Question Description
Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle:I. Trespass to chattels (goods or personal property) is an intentional interference with the possession of personal property, possibly causing injury.II. There are three elements to it:(a) Lack of consent in the interference with the property(b) The interference with the property must result in actual harm(c) The interference must be intentionalFacts: Wilbur left his logbook on his desk in the office. His colleague, Wilson, saw it lying there and thought he would take it and cross-check the records, even though it belonged to Wilbur. While checking the records, Wilson accidentally spilt ink on the logbook, and it was damaged to a great extent. It was the only copy Wilbur had.a)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as he intentionally interfered with hisproperty without consent and caused harm to itb)Wilbur may sue Wilson for trespass to chattel, but Wilson will only be responsible fortaking the logbook and not spilling ink as it was an accidentc)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as the logbook was a common officedocumentd)Wilbur may not sue Wilson for trespass to chattel as no actual harm resulted from hisactionsCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.