Question Description
The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. 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 The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The law of torts is fashioned as "an instrument to make people adhere to a conduct of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interests of one another." This it does by protecting interests and by providing for situations when a person whose protected interest is violated can recover compensation for the loss suffered by him from the person who has violated the same.Consequently, it has been implied that there are three constituents of tort:1. Wrongful Act: There must be a wrongful act committed by a person, that is, the defendant.2. Legal Damage: The wrongful act must give rise to legal damage to a person, that is, the plaintiff.3. Legal Remedy: The wrongful act must be of such a nature so as to give a rise to legal remedy in the form of an action for damages.An act which, prima facie, appears to be innocent may become tortuous, if it invades the legal right of another person. A simple example is that of erecting a structure on one's own land. It is completely lawful to enjoy one's own property by erecting whatever one wants to, on his land. To every right there corresponds an obligation or duty. If the right is legal, so is the duty. If the right is contingent, so is the obligation.INJURIA SINE DAMNOInjuria sine damno refers to the cases of infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This maxim says that the infringement of certain rights is itself considered as damage and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. Every person has an absolute right over his property, to the immunity of his person, and an infringement of these rights is actionable per se. Here, the law presumes damage because certain acts are so likely to result in harm owing to their mischievous tendency that law has strictly prohibited them. Under this maxim, actual or perceptible or appreciable loss or detriment is not indispensable to the foundation of an action.DAMNUM SINE INJURIADamnum sine injuria involves the cases in which there is no infringement of any right but the plaintiff has suffered actual damage. Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. In these cases, no action lies. Mere loss in money or money's worth does not, by itself, constitute a tort. The most terrible harm may be inflicted on one man by another without a legal redress being obtainable as the doer did not infringe any legal right of the sufferer. The maxim means, it can be implied, that there are no legal remedies for moral wrongs unless some rights of the victim are being violated.Q. It was an election day and Dude was very happy that he would get to vote for the first time as he had turned 18 finally. However, when he was on his way to the polling booth, Officer Badass stopped him from voting. Dude was an ideal devotee and wanted the GJP party member, Dogface, to win. He wanted to vote for him but couldn't because officer Badass stopped him. However, Dogface won. Decide the liability of the officer.a)The officer is not liable because at the end Dogface won, and he got the desired result.b)The officer is liable because of right of Dude was infringed and he suffered a legal injuryc)The officer is not liable because he has the authority to stop whosoever he wants.d)The officer is liable.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.