Question:

Principle: A person who keeps or engages with hazardous or inherently dangerous substances or activities is liable for any or all harm resulting from their escape or impact, regardless of the precautions taken, unless the harm was caused by an act of God, act of a third party, or consent of the victim.
Fact: Seema owns a perfume factory that lawfully stores large quantities of chemicals used in fragrance production. One night, a sudden lightning strike causes a fire, leading to the release of toxic fumes that harm nearby residents. Seema had complied with all safety requirements and had fireproof storage facilities in place.
Applying only the given principle to the fact, is Seema liable?

Show Hint

For principle-application questions, carefully match facts to the conditions and exceptions specified in the principle.
  • No, because the harm resulted from an act of God, not from her negligence.
  • Yes, because the chemicals were hazardous, and she owns the factory.
  • No, because she had taken all reasonable precautions to prevent such an accident.
  • Yes, because she failed to anticipate natural disasters while storing dangerous substances.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understand the principle — Liability applies unless harm is due to an act of God, third party, or victim consent.
Step 2: Analyze fact — Fire caused by lightning (act of God). Seema complied with all safety regulations.
Step 3: Apply principle — Liability does not apply because the harm resulted from an act of God.
Step 4: Conclusion — Option (a) is correct.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Statements and Inferences

View More Questions

Questions Asked in AILET exam

View More Questions