AILET 2018 BA LLB Question Paper with answer key for online practice
Show Para
Directions (Q. 72 - Q. 73):
Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer. Legal Principles :
1. Private nuisance is a continuous, unlawful and indirect interferencewith the use or enjoyment of land, or of some right over or in connection with it.
2. The person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it at his peril, and,if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.
3. A person is liable if he can reasonably foresee that his acts would likely to injure his neighbour.
4. The foresee ability ofthe type of damage is a pre-requisite of liability in actions of nuisance
Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer. Legal Principles :
1. Private nuisance is a continuous, unlawful and indirect interferencewith the use or enjoyment of land, or of some right over or in connection with it.
2. The person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it at his peril, and,if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.
3. A person is liable if he can reasonably foresee that his acts would likely to injure his neighbour.
4. The foresee ability ofthe type of damage is a pre-requisite of liability in actions of nuisance
© examsiri.com
Question : 72 of 150
Marks:
+1,
-0
Factual Situation : During 2011, a European Directive was issued requiring nations of the European Community to establish standards on the presence of Perchloroethene (PCE) in water, which the Kingsland did in 2013.
Alfa Water Co. purchased a boreholein 2007 to extract water to supply to the public in Kingsland. In 2014, it tested the water to ensure that it met minimum standards for human consumption and discovered that it was contaminated with an organochlorine solvent (PCE). On investigation, itemerged that the solvent seeped into the soil through the building floor of the Light & Soft Leather Tannery, about 3 miles from the borehole that eventually contaminated the Alfa’s borehole.
Since the tannery opened in 1910, until 2007, the solvent itused had been delivered in 40-gallon drums which were transported by fork lift truck and then tipped into a sump. Since 2007, solvents had been delivered in bulk and stored in tanks. It was then piped to the tanning machinery. There was no evidence ofany spills from the tanks or pipes, and it was concluded that the water had been contaminated by frequent spills under the earlier system. Alfa Water brought a claim against the Tannery on the grounds of nuisance. Whether the Tannery owners are liable?
Alfa Water Co. purchased a boreholein 2007 to extract water to supply to the public in Kingsland. In 2014, it tested the water to ensure that it met minimum standards for human consumption and discovered that it was contaminated with an organochlorine solvent (PCE). On investigation, itemerged that the solvent seeped into the soil through the building floor of the Light & Soft Leather Tannery, about 3 miles from the borehole that eventually contaminated the Alfa’s borehole.
Since the tannery opened in 1910, until 2007, the solvent itused had been delivered in 40-gallon drums which were transported by fork lift truck and then tipped into a sump. Since 2007, solvents had been delivered in bulk and stored in tanks. It was then piped to the tanning machinery. There was no evidence ofany spills from the tanks or pipes, and it was concluded that the water had been contaminated by frequent spills under the earlier system. Alfa Water brought a claim against the Tannery on the grounds of nuisance. Whether the Tannery owners are liable?
Go to Question: