Question:

Principle: Consent is a good defence for civil action in tort. But consent must include both knowledge of risk and assumption of risk, i.e., readiness to bear harm.
Facts: A lady passenger was aware that the driver of the cab, in which she opted to travel was little intoxicated. The cab met with an accident and lady got injured.

Show Hint

Knowledge of risk does not mean assuming the risk. Compensation can still be claimed if the person did not assume the risk.
Updated On: Aug 18, 2025
  • Driver can take the plea that he was lightly intoxicated.
  • Lady is not entitled to claim compensation as she had knowledge of the risk.
  • Lady is entitled to claim compensation as she only knew about risk and there was no assumption of risk.
  • Lady can refuse to pay the fare as she had suffered injuries.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

In this case, the lady passenger knew that the driver was intoxicated, but she did not assume the risk of harm arising from that knowledge. While she had knowledge of the risk, she did not explicitly consent to the harm occurring. Therefore, she is entitled to claim compensation for the injuries she sustained in the accident.


Option (A) Driver can take the plea that he was lightly intoxicated: This is incorrect. The driver’s intoxication is a factor, but it does not absolve him from liability for the accident.

Option (B) Lady is not entitled to claim compensation as she had knowledge of the risk: This is incorrect. Knowing about the risk does not equate to assuming it.

Option (D) Lady can refuse to pay the fare as she had suffered injuries: This is incorrect. The issue is not about paying the fare, but about claiming compensation for injuries suffered.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Law of Torts

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

View More Questions