Question

Legal Principle: Parents are not liable for wrongs committed by their children unless they provide the opportunity for such wrongful acts to be committed by their children.
Fact Situation: Sunil, a minor, takes the keys to his father’s car from the table top where his father keeps them. He then drives the car on the public road and hits a pedestrian who gets injured.
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?

• A. Since Sunil took the car without his father’s permission, his father is not liable for Sunil’s act resulting in the accident.
• B. Sunil’s father is liable for the conduct of Sunil resulting in the accident since he left the car keys where his son could easily take it without permission.
• C. Accidents happen despite utmost care and hence neither Sunil nor his father is liable in the instant case.
• D. Sunil’s father is not liable since he had kept his car locked and securely deposited its keys without negligence on his table top.

Hint:

Parental liability in law is not automatic — it usually arises when a parent’s negligence provides a clear opportunity for the child to commit a wrongful act. Always secure dangerous items, especially vehicles and weapons, away from minors.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Understanding the legal principle
- The general rule is that parents are not automatically liable for the wrongful acts of their children.
- However, if parents, by their own act or negligence, create a situation where a wrongful act by the child becomes possible, they can be held liable.
- This is based on the concept of negligent entrustment — leaving a dangerous instrument or vehicle accessible to a minor.
Step 2: Applying the facts
- Sunil is a minor who took his father’s car without permission.
- The father had left the car keys on a table top, in an easily accessible place.
- Because Sunil could take the keys without difficulty, the father’s negligence provided the opportunity for the wrongful act.
- The wrongful act here is Sunil driving without a licence and injuring a pedestrian.
Step 3: Linking facts with the principle
- Since the father’s negligence (leaving keys accessible) was a direct enabling factor for Sunil’s wrongful act, the legal principle makes him liable.
- The liability is not because Sunil is his son, but because the father facilitated the act through lack of proper precaution.
Step 4: Conclusion
- The most appropriate answer is option (2), as it directly aligns with the principle of parental liability arising from enabling conditions.
\[ \boxed{\text{Father is liable due to negligent access to car keys.}} \]