CameraIcon

SearchIcon

MyQuestionIcon

1

You visited us 1 times! Enjoying our articles? Unlock Full Access!

Land Pollution - Pesticides and Biomagnificaiton

LEGAL PRINCIP...

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Whoever stores a substance which could cause damage on escape shall be absolutely liable (i.e. liable even when he has exercised necessary care) for any damage caused by the escape of the substance.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) manufactured methyl isocyanate, an extremely toxic gas. Due to a storm, the gas that was being stored in sealed containers got released. Before much could happen, the local municipal authorities managed to contain the disaster. The authorities filed a suit against UCIL for the costs that were incurred in decontamination. However, later it was realized that the clean-up by the authorities could have been done without spending as much resources and the damage was not that significant. UCIL argued that it would pay only part of the amount demanded by the authorities.

DECIDE.

A

UCIL is liable only to the extent of contamination caused. It does not need to pay the authorities the entire amount demanded.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

B

The authorities are entitled to the whole sum, as UCIL shall be held liable for all the repercussions of their act even if they had exercised due care.

Right on! Give the BNAT exam to get a 100% scholarship for BYJUS courses

C

UCIL can plead that the escape of the gas had been caused by a storm and not due to its own negligence it was an inevitable accident.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

D

The municipal authorities should have analyzed the damage first before jumping into action. It was due to their own negligence because of which they had to shell out more than required.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Open in App

Solution

The correct option is B The authorities are entitled to the whole sum, as UCIL shall be held liable for all the repercussions of their act even if they had exercised due care.
According to the rule of absolute liability, if any person is engaged in an inherently dangerous or hazardous activity, and if any harm is caused to any person due to any accident which occurred during carrying out such inherently dangerous and hazardous activity, then the person who is carrying out such activity will be held absolutely liable. Hence, in the above case, UCIL shall be held liable.

Suggest Corrections

thumbs-up

0

Similar questions

Q. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Whoever stores a substance which could cause damage on escape shall be absolutely liable (i.e. liable even when he has exercised necessary care) for any damage caused by the escape of the substance.
FACTUAL SITUATION : Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) manufactured methyl isocyanate, an extremely toxic gas. Due to storm, the gas that was being stored in sealed containers got released. Before much could happen, the local municipal authorities managed to contain the disaster. The authorities filed a suit against UCIL for the costs that were incurred in decontamination. However, later it was realized that the clean-up by the authorities could have been done without spending as much resources and the damage was not significant. UCIL argued that it would pay only part of the amount demanded by the authorities, which could have dealt with the contamination.
DECISION:

Q. Principle: A Master is liable to third persons for every such wrong of his servant as committed in the course of service. For acts committed beyond the scope of employment, the master is liable only if he has expressly authorized the act. A owned a bus and he had hired B to drive it and C to be the conductor. One day, when B had stepped out of the bus to have a cup of coffee. C decided to turn the bus around so that it was ready for its next trip. While doing so, C ran over D's leg, causing major injuries to him. D sued A for damages.

Q. Given below are Legal Principles followed by a Factual Situation. Apply the principles followed by a factual Situation. Apply the principle to it and select the most appropriate answer for question among the four choices given.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person is liable for the consequences of his wrongful act only to the extent he can foresee the consequences of his act.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Rohan was suffering from a serious disease which required urgent medical attention. He got a seat booked in an Indian Airlines flight from his place to Delhi where such treatment is available. As he sat inside the plane, his fragile health condition was obvious to the flight attenders and they made special arrangements for him. But due to mechanical defects, which in turn could be attributed to bad maintenance the flight was delayed for hours together. As a result, by the time the flight reached Delhi. Rohan developed serious complications and he could not be saved. His heirs field a suit against Indian Airlines claiming damages for the death. Under the relevant law, the Airlines shall be liable for the damage caused by the dealy.

Q. LEGAL PRINCIPLE:
(1) No fault liability means liability of a person even without any negligent act on his part and even if he has taken due care and caution.
(2) If a person brings and keeps any dangerous thing on his land, then he is liable for any damage caused if the thing escapes.
(3) No one can be penalized for an Act of God, which is unforeseeable and unpredictable.

FACTUAL SITUATION: B owned and managed a company supplying electricity to the nearby locality. On a particular windy and stormy day, one of the wires snapped and was hanging down. A, a cyclist who was driving in the night, saw the wire from a distance. There was a nearby street light with low visibility. He came in contact with the wire and was electrocuted immediately. His heirs sued A on ground of strict liability.

Q. Given below are Legal Principles followed by a Factual Situation. Apply the principles followed by a factual Situation. Apply the principle to it and select the most appropriate answer for the question among the four choices given.

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person, who lawfully brings on his land something which through harmless, but will do mischief if it escapes, must keep it at his peril, and if he does not, he is answerable for all the damage.

FACTUAL SITUATION: 'A' was the owner of a mill. In order to supply it with water, he constructed a reservoir upon nearby land by employing, engineers and contractors. 'B' was the owner of coal mines, under the land, close to but not adjoining the premises on which the reservoir was constructed. The contractors, while excavating for the bed of the reservoir, came upon abandoned mine shafts. The reservoir was completed and partly filled. Within days the bed of the reservoir gave way and burst, leading to flow of water through the channels connected with 'B''s mine. Is 'A' liable to pay damage for loss caused to 'B'?

View More

Join BYJU'S Learning Program

similar_icon

Related Videos

lock

Concepts and Practice

CHEMISTRY

Watch in App

explore_more_icon

Explore more

Land Pollution - Pesticides and Biomagnificaiton

Standard XII Chemistry

Join BYJU'S Learning Program

CrossIcon