Question:

Principles:
1. A person is liable for negligence if he fails to take care of his neighbour’s interest.
2. A neighbour is anyone whose interests should have been foreseeable.
Facts: During a cricket match in a closed stadium, a fan who could not get a ticket climbed a nearby tree to watch. A ball hit him, causing injury. He sued the organizers.
Possible decisions:
(a) Organizers liable to compensate
(b) Organizers not liable
(c) Injured person should have avoided the risky spot
Possible reasons:
(i) Organizers are responsible for people inside the stadium.
(ii) Organizers could not have foreseen someone watching from a tree.
(iii) A person crazy about something must take the risk.
(iv) Organizers must be liable to all viewers.

Show Hint

Negligence liability requires that the harm to the plaintiff was a foreseeable risk of the defendant’s actions.
Updated On: Aug 12, 2025
  • (a) (iv)
  • (a) (iii)
  • (b) (ii)
  • (c) (i)
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Foreseeability test. Organizers could foresee risks to ticket holders inside the stadium but not to trespassers perched in a tree.
Step 2: Application. Since the injured person was outside in an unusual location, the organizers could not reasonably foresee harm to him.
Step 3: Conclusion. Decision (b) with reason (ii) — no liability as harm was not foreseeable.
\[ \boxed{\text{Correct answer: (c) (b) (ii)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Law of Torts

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

View More Questions