Question Description
Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide:a)Clearly, Sanjay filed the case against Suneel out of spite and this case should not be heard by the court.b)This was malicious prosecution as Sanjay filed a case against Suneel despite knowing that Suneel had the liberty to quit the job at will.c)This is not malicious prosecution because there was no prosecution at all.d)It cannot be determined.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.