List of top Legal Studies Questions

Principles: (1) Consumable goods which are not fit for consumption are not marketable.
(2) A consumer shall not suffer on account of unmarketable goods.
(3) A seller is liable for knowingly selling unmarketable goods.
(4) A manufacturer shall be liable for the quality of his products.
Facts: Ram bought a Coca Cola bottle from Shama’s shop. Back at home, the server opened the bottle and poured the drink into the glasses of Ram and his friend Tom. As Tom started drinking, he felt irritation in his throat. Immediately, Ram and Tom took the sample to test and found nitric acid in the content. Ram filed a suit against Shama, Coca Cola company, and the bottler, Kishen & Co. Suggested Decisions: (a) Ram cannot get compensation
(b) Tom cannot get compensation
(c) Both Ram and Tom can get compensation
Suggested Reasons: (i) Shama did not know the contents of sealed bottles.
(ii) Ram did not actually suffer though he bought the bottle.
(iii) Tom did not buy the bottle.
(iv) Coca Cola company is responsible since it supplied the concentrate.
(v) Kishen & Co. is responsible since it added water, sugar etc. and sealed the bottle.
(vi) Shama is responsible for selling the defective product.

All contracts are agreements. All agreements are accepted offers. Which of the following derivations is correct?

No minor can enter into a contract of work. Working in a shop can be done only by a contract. Which derivation is correct?

All motor vehicles are required to have third party insurance. Any vehicle not using mechanical device is not a motor vehicle. Which is the correct derivation?

A contract contravening public policy is void. There cannot be a general definition of public policy. Which is the correct derivation?

International law is the law between sovereign states. A sovereign is the supreme authority not bound by legal constraints. Which is the correct derivation?

Principles:
1. An employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.
2. Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.
Facts: Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from its customers daily. Nagamma, a housemaid, was one of such customers. After a couple of years, Syndicate Bank terminated Nandan’s service. Unaware of this, Nagamma continued to hand over her savings to Nandan, who misappropriated them. She realized this after three months and filed a complaint against the bank.
Possible decisions:
(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence
Possible reasons:
(i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after termination.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the bank about Nandan.
(iv) The bank is entitled to expect customers to know the actual position.

Principles:
1. The owner of land has absolute interest in the property including the contents over and under the property.
2. Water flowing below your land is not yours, though you may use it.
3. Any construction on your land belongs to you.
4. All mineral resources below the land belong to the State.
Facts: There is a subterranean water flow under Suresh’s land. Suresh constructed a huge reservoir and drew all subterranean water into it. As a result, the wells of adjacent owners went dry. They demanded that Suresh either demolish the reservoir or share the water.
Proposed decisions:
(a) Suresh need not demolish the reservoir.
(b) Suresh has to demolish the reservoir.
(c) Suresh has to share the water with his neighbours.
(d) The Government can take over the reservoir.
Possible reasons:
(i) Water cannot be captured by one person for his personal use.
(ii) The government must ensure equitable distribution of water.
(iii) Whatever is under Suresh’s land may be used by him.
(iv) Suresh has to respect the rights of others regarding water.

Principles:
1. When a person unlawfully interferes with another’s chattel depriving him of its use, it is conversion.
2. Nobody shall enrich himself at another's expense.
Facts: A patient’s appendix was removed at a hospital. The hospital used unique cells from it to develop valuable drugs. The patient, learning of this later, claimed a profit share.
Possible decisions:
(a) Hospital need not share profits
(b) Hospital may share on ex gratia basis
(c) Hospital shall share profits
Possible reasons:
(i) The patient benefited from removal.
(ii) Hospital’s research was its own effort.
(iii) Hospital could not have succeeded without the appendix.
(iv) Everyone must share.