question_answer

Direction: This section consists of fifty (50) questions. Each question consists of legal propositions/principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. \n other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further, You must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. \t is not the object of this section to test your knowledge of law.

Principle: A person has no legal remedy for an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.

Facts: 'R', a cricket enthusiast, purchases a ticket to watch a T20 match organised by the Indian Premier League (IPL). During the match, a ball struck for six hits 'R' on his body and injures him. He sues IPL for compensation for the medical expenses.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

A) 'R' should be compensated as he purchased the ticket to get entertainment and not to get injured

B) 'R' would fail in his action, as he voluntarily exposed himself to the risk

C) IPL would be liable as it did not ensure that the spectators were protected from the risk of such injuries

D) None of the above