Tort (CLAT Legal-Aptitude): Questions 46 - 46 of 82
Get 1 year subscription: Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 1066 questions. Access all new questions we will add tracking exam-pattern and syllabus changes. View Sample Explanation or View Features.
Rs. 450.00 or
Question number: 46
Appeared in Year: 2014
PRINCIPLES: Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent’s negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.
FACTS: `D’ went to a cafe and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque, and, therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She (‘D’) consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. `D’ later complained of a stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She sued the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.
Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is CORRECT as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?
The manufacturer could be made liable under criminal law, but not for tort of negligence
The manufacturer is not liable for negligence because it would otherwise become very difficult for the manufacturers to do business
The manufacturer is not liable for negligence, as there is no direct contract between D and the manufacturer. No duty is owed by the manufacturer towards a particular consumer D
The manufacturer is liable for negligence, as it owed a duty (to consumers) to take reasonable care to ensure that its products are safe for consumption