Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Fill in the blank by choosing the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and choose the most appropriate option to the questions given below. |
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in the early 1990s as a component of the Uruguay Round negotiation. However, it could have been negotiated as part of the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, since negotiation was an attempt at a 'constitutional reform' of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Or it could have been put off to the future, as the US government wanted. What factors led to the creation of the WTO in the early 1990s? One factor was the pattern of multilateral bargaining that developed late in the Uruguay Round. Like all complex international agreements, the WTO was a product of a series of trade-offs between principal actors and groups. For the United States, which did not want a new organization, the disputed settlement part of the WTO package achieved its longstanding goal of a more effective and more legal dispute settlement system. For the Europeans, who by the 1990s had come to view GATT dispute settlement less in political terms add more as a regime of legal obligations, the WTO package was acceptable as a means to discipline the resort to unilateral measures by the United States. Countries like Canada and other middle and smaller trading partners were attracted by the expansion of a rule-based system and by the symbolic value of a trade organization, both of which inherently support the weak against the strong. The developing countries were attracted due to the provisions banning unilateral measures. Finally, and perhaps most important, many countries at the Uruguay Round came to put a higher priority on the export gains than on the import losses that the negotiation would produce, and they came to associate the WTO and a rule-based system with those gains. This reasoningreplicated in many countrieswas contained in U. S. Ambassador Kantor's defense of the WTO, and it announced to recognition that international trade and its benefits cannot be enjoyed unless trading nations accept the discipline of a negotiated rule-based environment. A second factor in the creation of the WTO was pressure from lawyers and the legal process. The dispute settlement system of the WTO was seen as a victory of legalists but the matter went deeper than that. The GATT, and the WTO, is contract organizations based on rules, and it is inevitable that an organization creating a further rule will in turn be influenced by legal process. Robert Hudee has written of the 'momentum of legal development', but what is this precisely? Legal Development can be defined as promotion of the technical legal values of consistency, clarity (or certainty) and effectiveness; these are values that those responsible for administering any legal system will seek to maximize. As it played out in the WTO consistency meant integrating under one roof the whole lot of separate agreements signed under GATT auspices; clarity meant removing ambiguities about the powers of contracting parties to make certain decisions or to undertake waivers; and effectiveness meant eliminating exceptions arising out of grandfather-rights and resolving defects in dispute settlement procedures and institutional provisions. Concern for these values is inherent in any rule-based system of co-operation, since without these value rules would be meaningless in the first place, therefore, create their own incentive for fulfilment. The moment of legal development has occurred in other institutions besides the GATT, most notably in the European Union (EU). Over the past two decades the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has consistently rendered decisions that have expanded incrementally the EU's internal market, in which the doctrine of 'mutual recognition' handed down in Cassis de Dijon case in 1979 was a key turning point. The court is now widely recognized as a major player in European integration, even though arguably such a strong role was not originally envisaged in the Treaty of Rome, which initiated the current European Union. One means the Court used to expand integration was the 'teleological method of interpretation', whereby the actions of member states were evaluated against 'the accomplishment of the most elementary goals set forth in the Preamble to the (Rome) treaty. The teleological method represents an effort to keep current policies consistent with slated goals, and it is analogous to the effort in GATT to keep contracting party trade practices consistent with slated rules. In both cases legal concerns and procedures are an independent force for further co-operation. In the large part the WTO was an exercise in consolidation. In the context of a trade negotiation that created a near-revolutionary expansion of international trade rules, the formation of the WTO was a deeply conservative act needed to ensure that the benefits of the new rules would not be lost. The WTO was all about institutional structure and dispute settlement: these are the concerns of conservatives and not revolutionaries that is why lawyers and legalists took the lead on these issues. The WTO codified the GATT institutional practice that had developed by custom over three decades, and it incorporated a new dispute settlement system that was necessary to keep both old and new rules from becoming a sham. Both the international structure and the dispute settlement system were necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of the multilateral trade regime that had been built incrementally from the 1940s to the 1990s. |
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and choose the most appropriate option to the questions given below. |
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in the early 1990s as a component of the Uruguay Round negotiation. However, it could have been negotiated as part of the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, since negotiation was an attempt at a 'constitutional reform' of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Or it could have been put off to the future, as the US government wanted. What factors led to the creation of the WTO in the early 1990s? One factor was the pattern of multilateral bargaining that developed late in the Uruguay Round. Like all complex international agreements, the WTO was a product of a series of trade-offs between principal actors and groups. For the United States, which did not want a new organization, the disputed settlement part of the WTO package achieved its longstanding goal of a more effective and more legal dispute settlement system. For the Europeans, who by the 1990s had come to view GATT dispute settlement less in political terms add more as a regime of legal obligations, the WTO package was acceptable as a means to discipline the resort to unilateral measures by the United States. Countries like Canada and other middle and smaller trading partners were attracted by the expansion of a rule-based system and by the symbolic value of a trade organization, both of which inherently support the weak against the strong. The developing countries were attracted due to the provisions banning unilateral measures. Finally, and perhaps most important, many countries at the Uruguay Round came to put a higher priority on the export gains than on the import losses that the negotiation would produce, and they came to associate the WTO and a rule-based system with those gains. This reasoningreplicated in many countrieswas contained in U. S. Ambassador Kantor's defense of the WTO, and it announced to recognition that international trade and its benefits cannot be enjoyed unless trading nations accept the discipline of a negotiated rule-based environment. A second factor in the creation of the WTO was pressure from lawyers and the legal process. The dispute settlement system of the WTO was seen as a victory of legalists but the matter went deeper than that. The GATT, and the WTO, is contract organizations based on rules, and it is inevitable that an organization creating a further rule will in turn be influenced by legal process. Robert Hudee has written of the 'momentum of legal development', but what is this precisely? Legal Development can be defined as promotion of the technical legal values of consistency, clarity (or certainty) and effectiveness; these are values that those responsible for administering any legal system will seek to maximize. As it played out in the WTO consistency meant integrating under one roof the whole lot of separate agreements signed under GATT auspices; clarity meant removing ambiguities about the powers of contracting parties to make certain decisions or to undertake waivers; and effectiveness meant eliminating exceptions arising out of grandfather-rights and resolving defects in dispute settlement procedures and institutional provisions. Concern for these values is inherent in any rule-based system of co-operation, since without these value rules would be meaningless in the first place, therefore, create their own incentive for fulfilment. The moment of legal development has occurred in other institutions besides the GATT, most notably in the European Union (EU). Over the past two decades the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has consistently rendered decisions that have expanded incrementally the EU's internal market, in which the doctrine of 'mutual recognition' handed down in Cassis de Dijon case in 1979 was a key turning point. The court is now widely recognized as a major player in European integration, even though arguably such a strong role was not originally envisaged in the Treaty of Rome, which initiated the current European Union. One means the Court used to expand integration was the 'teleological method of interpretation', whereby the actions of member states were evaluated against 'the accomplishment of the most elementary goals set forth in the Preamble to the (Rome) treaty. The teleological method represents an effort to keep current policies consistent with slated goals, and it is analogous to the effort in GATT to keep contracting party trade practices consistent with slated rules. In both cases legal concerns and procedures are an independent force for further co-operation. In the large part the WTO was an exercise in consolidation. In the context of a trade negotiation that created a near-revolutionary expansion of international trade rules, the formation of the WTO was a deeply conservative act needed to ensure that the benefits of the new rules would not be lost. The WTO was all about institutional structure and dispute settlement: these are the concerns of conservatives and not revolutionaries that is why lawyers and legalists took the lead on these issues. The WTO codified the GATT institutional practice that had developed by custom over three decades, and it incorporated a new dispute settlement system that was necessary to keep both old and new rules from becoming a sham. Both the international structure and the dispute settlement system were necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of the multilateral trade regime that had been built incrementally from the 1940s to the 1990s. |
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and choose the most appropriate option to the questions given below. |
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in the early 1990s as a component of the Uruguay Round negotiation. However, it could have been negotiated as part of the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, since negotiation was an attempt at a 'constitutional reform' of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Or it could have been put off to the future, as the US government wanted. What factors led to the creation of the WTO in the early 1990s? One factor was the pattern of multilateral bargaining that developed late in the Uruguay Round. Like all complex international agreements, the WTO was a product of a series of trade-offs between principal actors and groups. For the United States, which did not want a new organization, the disputed settlement part of the WTO package achieved its longstanding goal of a more effective and more legal dispute settlement system. For the Europeans, who by the 1990s had come to view GATT dispute settlement less in political terms add more as a regime of legal obligations, the WTO package was acceptable as a means to discipline the resort to unilateral measures by the United States. Countries like Canada and other middle and smaller trading partners were attracted by the expansion of a rule-based system and by the symbolic value of a trade organization, both of which inherently support the weak against the strong. The developing countries were attracted due to the provisions banning unilateral measures. Finally, and perhaps most important, many countries at the Uruguay Round came to put a higher priority on the export gains than on the import losses that the negotiation would produce, and they came to associate the WTO and a rule-based system with those gains. This reasoningreplicated in many countrieswas contained in U. S. Ambassador Kantor's defense of the WTO, and it announced to recognition that international trade and its benefits cannot be enjoyed unless trading nations accept the discipline of a negotiated rule-based environment. A second factor in the creation of the WTO was pressure from lawyers and the legal process. The dispute settlement system of the WTO was seen as a victory of legalists but the matter went deeper than that. The GATT, and the WTO, is contract organizations based on rules, and it is inevitable that an organization creating a further rule will in turn be influenced by legal process. Robert Hudee has written of the 'momentum of legal development', but what is this precisely? Legal Development can be defined as promotion of the technical legal values of consistency, clarity (or certainty) and effectiveness; these are values that those responsible for administering any legal system will seek to maximize. As it played out in the WTO consistency meant integrating under one roof the whole lot of separate agreements signed under GATT auspices; clarity meant removing ambiguities about the powers of contracting parties to make certain decisions or to undertake waivers; and effectiveness meant eliminating exceptions arising out of grandfather-rights and resolving defects in dispute settlement procedures and institutional provisions. Concern for these values is inherent in any rule-based system of co-operation, since without these value rules would be meaningless in the first place, therefore, create their own incentive for fulfilment. The moment of legal development has occurred in other institutions besides the GATT, most notably in the European Union (EU). Over the past two decades the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has consistently rendered decisions that have expanded incrementally the EU's internal market, in which the doctrine of 'mutual recognition' handed down in Cassis de Dijon case in 1979 was a key turning point. The court is now widely recognized as a major player in European integration, even though arguably such a strong role was not originally envisaged in the Treaty of Rome, which initiated the current European Union. One means the Court used to expand integration was the 'teleological method of interpretation', whereby the actions of member states were evaluated against 'the accomplishment of the most elementary goals set forth in the Preamble to the (Rome) treaty. The teleological method represents an effort to keep current policies consistent with slated goals, and it is analogous to the effort in GATT to keep contracting party trade practices consistent with slated rules. In both cases legal concerns and procedures are an independent force for further co-operation. In the large part the WTO was an exercise in consolidation. In the context of a trade negotiation that created a near-revolutionary expansion of international trade rules, the formation of the WTO was a deeply conservative act needed to ensure that the benefits of the new rules would not be lost. The WTO was all about institutional structure and dispute settlement: these are the concerns of conservatives and not revolutionaries that is why lawyers and legalists took the lead on these issues. The WTO codified the GATT institutional practice that had developed by custom over three decades, and it incorporated a new dispute settlement system that was necessary to keep both old and new rules from becoming a sham. Both the international structure and the dispute settlement system were necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of the multilateral trade regime that had been built incrementally from the 1940s to the 1990s. |
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and choose the most appropriate option to the questions given below. |
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in the early 1990s as a component of the Uruguay Round negotiation. However, it could have been negotiated as part of the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, since negotiation was an attempt at a 'constitutional reform' of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Or it could have been put off to the future, as the US government wanted. What factors led to the creation of the WTO in the early 1990s? One factor was the pattern of multilateral bargaining that developed late in the Uruguay Round. Like all complex international agreements, the WTO was a product of a series of trade-offs between principal actors and groups. For the United States, which did not want a new organization, the disputed settlement part of the WTO package achieved its longstanding goal of a more effective and more legal dispute settlement system. For the Europeans, who by the 1990s had come to view GATT dispute settlement less in political terms add more as a regime of legal obligations, the WTO package was acceptable as a means to discipline the resort to unilateral measures by the United States. Countries like Canada and other middle and smaller trading partners were attracted by the expansion of a rule-based system and by the symbolic value of a trade organization, both of which inherently support the weak against the strong. The developing countries were attracted due to the provisions banning unilateral measures. Finally, and perhaps most important, many countries at the Uruguay Round came to put a higher priority on the export gains than on the import losses that the negotiation would produce, and they came to associate the WTO and a rule-based system with those gains. This reasoningreplicated in many countrieswas contained in U. S. Ambassador Kantor's defense of the WTO, and it announced to recognition that international trade and its benefits cannot be enjoyed unless trading nations accept the discipline of a negotiated rule-based environment. A second factor in the creation of the WTO was pressure from lawyers and the legal process. The dispute settlement system of the WTO was seen as a victory of legalists but the matter went deeper than that. The GATT, and the WTO, is contract organizations based on rules, and it is inevitable that an organization creating a further rule will in turn be influenced by legal process. Robert Hudee has written of the 'momentum of legal development', but what is this precisely? Legal Development can be defined as promotion of the technical legal values of consistency, clarity (or certainty) and effectiveness; these are values that those responsible for administering any legal system will seek to maximize. As it played out in the WTO consistency meant integrating under one roof the whole lot of separate agreements signed under GATT auspices; clarity meant removing ambiguities about the powers of contracting parties to make certain decisions or to undertake waivers; and effectiveness meant eliminating exceptions arising out of grandfather-rights and resolving defects in dispute settlement procedures and institutional provisions. Concern for these values is inherent in any rule-based system of co-operation, since without these value rules would be meaningless in the first place, therefore, create their own incentive for fulfilment. The moment of legal development has occurred in other institutions besides the GATT, most notably in the European Union (EU). Over the past two decades the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has consistently rendered decisions that have expanded incrementally the EU's internal market, in which the doctrine of 'mutual recognition' handed down in Cassis de Dijon case in 1979 was a key turning point. The court is now widely recognized as a major player in European integration, even though arguably such a strong role was not originally envisaged in the Treaty of Rome, which initiated the current European Union. One means the Court used to expand integration was the 'teleological method of interpretation', whereby the actions of member states were evaluated against 'the accomplishment of the most elementary goals set forth in the Preamble to the (Rome) treaty. The teleological method represents an effort to keep current policies consistent with slated goals, and it is analogous to the effort in GATT to keep contracting party trade practices consistent with slated rules. In both cases legal concerns and procedures are an independent force for further co-operation. In the large part the WTO was an exercise in consolidation. In the context of a trade negotiation that created a near-revolutionary expansion of international trade rules, the formation of the WTO was a deeply conservative act needed to ensure that the benefits of the new rules would not be lost. The WTO was all about institutional structure and dispute settlement: these are the concerns of conservatives and not revolutionaries that is why lawyers and legalists took the lead on these issues. The WTO codified the GATT institutional practice that had developed by custom over three decades, and it incorporated a new dispute settlement system that was necessary to keep both old and new rules from becoming a sham. Both the international structure and the dispute settlement system were necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of the multilateral trade regime that had been built incrementally from the 1940s to the 1990s. |
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and choose the most appropriate option to the questions given below. |
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created in the early 1990s as a component of the Uruguay Round negotiation. However, it could have been negotiated as part of the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, since negotiation was an attempt at a 'constitutional reform' of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Or it could have been put off to the future, as the US government wanted. What factors led to the creation of the WTO in the early 1990s? One factor was the pattern of multilateral bargaining that developed late in the Uruguay Round. Like all complex international agreements, the WTO was a product of a series of trade-offs between principal actors and groups. For the United States, which did not want a new organization, the disputed settlement part of the WTO package achieved its longstanding goal of a more effective and more legal dispute settlement system. For the Europeans, who by the 1990s had come to view GATT dispute settlement less in political terms add more as a regime of legal obligations, the WTO package was acceptable as a means to discipline the resort to unilateral measures by the United States. Countries like Canada and other middle and smaller trading partners were attracted by the expansion of a rule-based system and by the symbolic value of a trade organization, both of which inherently support the weak against the strong. The developing countries were attracted due to the provisions banning unilateral measures. Finally, and perhaps most important, many countries at the Uruguay Round came to put a higher priority on the export gains than on the import losses that the negotiation would produce, and they came to associate the WTO and a rule-based system with those gains. This reasoningreplicated in many countrieswas contained in U. S. Ambassador Kantor's defense of the WTO, and it announced to recognition that international trade and its benefits cannot be enjoyed unless trading nations accept the discipline of a negotiated rule-based environment. A second factor in the creation of the WTO was pressure from lawyers and the legal process. The dispute settlement system of the WTO was seen as a victory of legalists but the matter went deeper than that. The GATT, and the WTO, is contract organizations based on rules, and it is inevitable that an organization creating a further rule will in turn be influenced by legal process. Robert Hudee has written of the 'momentum of legal development', but what is this precisely? Legal Development can be defined as promotion of the technical legal values of consistency, clarity (or certainty) and effectiveness; these are values that those responsible for administering any legal system will seek to maximize. As it played out in the WTO consistency meant integrating under one roof the whole lot of separate agreements signed under GATT auspices; clarity meant removing ambiguities about the powers of contracting parties to make certain decisions or to undertake waivers; and effectiveness meant eliminating exceptions arising out of grandfather-rights and resolving defects in dispute settlement procedures and institutional provisions. Concern for these values is inherent in any rule-based system of co-operation, since without these value rules would be meaningless in the first place, therefore, create their own incentive for fulfilment. The moment of legal development has occurred in other institutions besides the GATT, most notably in the European Union (EU). Over the past two decades the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has consistently rendered decisions that have expanded incrementally the EU's internal market, in which the doctrine of 'mutual recognition' handed down in Cassis de Dijon case in 1979 was a key turning point. The court is now widely recognized as a major player in European integration, even though arguably such a strong role was not originally envisaged in the Treaty of Rome, which initiated the current European Union. One means the Court used to expand integration was the 'teleological method of interpretation', whereby the actions of member states were evaluated against 'the accomplishment of the most elementary goals set forth in the Preamble to the (Rome) treaty. The teleological method represents an effort to keep current policies consistent with slated goals, and it is analogous to the effort in GATT to keep contracting party trade practices consistent with slated rules. In both cases legal concerns and procedures are an independent force for further co-operation. In the large part the WTO was an exercise in consolidation. In the context of a trade negotiation that created a near-revolutionary expansion of international trade rules, the formation of the WTO was a deeply conservative act needed to ensure that the benefits of the new rules would not be lost. The WTO was all about institutional structure and dispute settlement: these are the concerns of conservatives and not revolutionaries that is why lawyers and legalists took the lead on these issues. The WTO codified the GATT institutional practice that had developed by custom over three decades, and it incorporated a new dispute settlement system that was necessary to keep both old and new rules from becoming a sham. Both the international structure and the dispute settlement system were necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of the multilateral trade regime that had been built incrementally from the 1940s to the 1990s. |
Direction: In each of the following sentences, some part of the sentence or the entire sentence is underlined. Beneath each sentence, you will find four ways of phrasing the underlined part. Choose the most appropriate option given in each of the sentences given below that is the best version than the underlined part of the sentence. |
Direction: In each of the following sentences, some part of the sentence or the entire sentence is underlined. Beneath each sentence, you will find four ways of phrasing the underlined part. Choose the most appropriate option given in each of the sentences given below that is the best version than the underlined part of the sentence. |
Direction: In each of the following sentences, some part of the sentence or the entire sentence is underlined. Beneath each sentence, you will find four ways of phrasing the underlined part. Choose the most appropriate option given in each of the sentences given below that is the best version than the underlined part of the sentence. |
Direction: In each of the following sentences, some part of the sentence or the entire sentence is underlined. Beneath each sentence, you will find four ways of phrasing the underlined part. Choose the most appropriate option given in each of the sentences given below that is the best version than the underlined part of the sentence. |
Direction: In each of the following sentences, some part of the sentence or the entire sentence is underlined. Beneath each sentence, you will find four ways of phrasing the underlined part. Choose the most appropriate option given in each of the sentences given below that is the best version than the underlined part of the sentence. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: Choose the correct spellings in questions given below. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: in each of the following sentences four words or phrases are underlined. \f there is any mistake with regard to grammar or usage, it is in the underlined part only. Identify the incorrect part. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: The concept of natural justice is against bias and for the right to a fair hearing. While the term natural justice is often retained as a general concept and it has largely been replaced and extended by the general 'duty to act fairly'. |
Fact: 'X', a male employee of a company was dismissed by the employer just on the basis of a complaint by T. a female employee of the company that 'X' was trying to be too friendly with her and often requested her to accompany him to the canteen. Is the dismissal of 'X' valid? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Ownership in property consists of right to possess, right to use, right to alienate and right to exclude others. Sale is complete when property gets transferred from the seller to the buyer on sale. |
Facts: 'A' sold his carto 'B'. After this, 'B' requested 'A to keep the car in his care on behalf 'B' for one month. 'A' agreed. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary Tribunals, is void to that extent. The law also provides that nobody can confer jurisdiction to a civil court by an agreement between parties. |
Facts: A and B entered into a valid contract for rendering certain service. A clause in the contract was that in case of any dispute arose out of the contract; it shall be referred to for Arbitration only. Is the contract valid? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: It is a case of fraud where a party to a contract knows or believes a fact to be true, but conceals it actively from the other party with a view to induce that person to enter into the contract. |
Facts: While taking a life insurance policy, in reply to questions by the insurance company during the inquiry into his proposal. Zameer deliberately concealed the fact of his medical treatment for a serious ailment, which he had undergone only a few weeks ago. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Contract is a written or spoken agreement, with specific terms between two or more persons or entities in which there is a promise to do something in return for a valuable benefit known as consideration. Such an agreement is intended to be enforceable by law. A unilateral contract is one in which there is a promise to pay or give other consideration in return for actual performance. |
Facts: A Toilet Soap Manufacturing Company in India in order to promote the sale of their product published an advertisement in all the Newspapers on 1 January 2017 that the company has kept a model ignition key of an Audi A3 car. The advertisement also stated that whoever gets the said key before 31 December 2017 from a soap bar will be gifted with the Audi A3 car. Mr Martin, a foreigner who came to India as a Tourist who was staying in a hotel found a key similar to same car ignition key. Mr Martin brought this matter to the notice of the Hotel Manager. The Manager informed Mr Martin about the Company's advertisement on 1 January 2017. Mr Martin wants to claim the car. Will he succeed? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person who has made a promise to another person to do something does not fulfil his promise, the other person becomes entitled to receive, from the person who did not fulfil his promise, compensation in the form of money. |
Facts: 'X' made a promise to T to repair his car engine. T made the payment for repair. After the repair, T went for a drive in the same car. While driving the car, T met with an accident due to bursting of a tyre. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: In criminal law, misappropriation is the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one's own use or other unauthorized purpose, particularly by a public official, a trustee of a trust, an executor or administrator of a dead person's estate or by any person with a responsibility to care for and protect another's assets. Embezzlement is misappropriation when the funds involved have been lawfully entrusted to the embezzler. On the contrary, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. |
Facts: A went for swimming at the Municipal Swimming Pool. A handed over all his valuables. Including some cash to X. the guard on duty for safe custody, as notified by the Municipality. After swimming for an hour, A came out and searched for X. He found another guard on duty and that guard informed A that X had gone home after completing his shift and did not hand over anything to be given to A. A registered a complaint with the police. X was traced but he told the police that he sold all the valuables and the entire cash was used for drinking liquor. What offence, if any, was/were committed by X? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, an employer is liable to pay compensation to his workmen for injuries sustained by them by an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. |
Facts: M, the Manager of SRK Industries asked his secretary S to submit a report at the Government Labor Office. 'S' submitted the report as directed. On his way back S met one of his class mates. He then decided to have a cup of tea together on a way side restaurant. Sometime later, 'S' got a message from his office to report back as it was long time since he left the office. 'S' rushed back on his Motor Cycle. On his way back a Truck which was coming from a side road hit 'S'. He was admitted in a nearby hospital with multiple injuries. |
He claims compensation under the Employees Compensation Act from his employer. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: If a party to a contract agrees to it under undue influence of any other party then the party under the undue influence may refuse to perform in accordance with the agreement. |
Facts: A, a rich youngster became a member of a religious group and soon he was appointed by P the head of the group as his personal secretary. As per the rules of the group, all officials and staff of the group were supposed to stay in the group's official premises itself. Some days later, A was asked by P to execute a Gift deed in favor of P. in which it was mentioned that all immovable properties in his name are being gifted to P. A was unwilling to execute the deed, but he was forcefully restrained by P and his body guards in P's office and made a sign the gift deed. Soon after this A left the group and refused to hand over the property as agreed to in the gift deed. Is As action valid? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Penal laws provide that whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man or woman, shall be punished for rape. |
Facts: A police officer found a man engaged in carnal intercourse with an animal. The police officer arrested the man and produced him before the Court |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: According to law, a person who fined goods belonging to another and takes them into his custody, is subject to the same responsibility as a bailee. Bailee is a person or party to whom goods are delivered for a purpose, such as custody or repair, without trfer of ownership. The finder of the goods legally can sell the goods found by him under certain circumstances including the situation that the owner refuses to pay the lawful charges of the finder. |
Facts: P, a college student, while coming out of a cricket stadium found a necklace, studded with apparently precious diamonds. P kept it for two days thinking that the owner would notify it in a local newspaper. Since he did not notice any such notification, P published a small classified advertisement in a local newspaper. In two days' time. P was contacted by a film actor claiming that it was her Necklace and requested P to return it to her. P told her that she should compensate him for the advertisement charges then only he would return it otherwise he will sell it and make good his expenses. The film star told P that she had advertised in a national newspaper about her lost Necklace which was lost somewhere in the cricket Stadium. The advertisement was published for three consecutive days incurring a large expenditure for her. Mentioning all this she refuses to pay P and claims the Necklace back. Which among the following is the most appropriate answer to this? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: A violation of a legal right of someone, whether results in a legal injury or not, gives rise to an action in tort for compensation. At the same time, an action by someone, which results in some loss or damage to somebody else is not actionable, if there is no violation of a right of that somebody. |
Facts: AB Coaching Centre was a popular CLAT coaching academy with several good trainers. A lot of aspirants used to attend its coaching classes from all over and was making good profit. This was going on for the past several years. During a session, T, one of the very good and popular trainers of ABCC, had some difference of opinion with the owner of ABCC and left the coaching center. In August 2016, T started another Entrance Coaching Centre closer to ABCC which resulted in a substantial drop in its students and huge financial loss. The owner of ABCC wants to file a case against T for the loss sustained by ABCC. What do you think is the right legal position? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: An offer made by one party when accepted by another makes it a contract. |
Transactions: |
1. P offered to sell his house for Rs 20 lakhs to R; R told P that he was interested to buy a house for 15 lakhs only. |
2. C was looking for a house for not more than 25 lakhs; P informed C that his house was available for 20 lakhs. |
3. K wanted to buy some old furniture; L told K that he would sell his furniture for Rs 10, 000. |
4. R advertised to sell his old car for a price of Rs. Three lakhs; S found the advertisement and offered to buy it for Rs 2 lakhs 50 thousand; R agrees to sell it to S. Which among the above is actually a contract? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Every agreement, of which the object or consideration is opposed to public policy, is void. An agreement which has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare is one against public policy. What constitutes an injury to public interest or public welfare would depend upon the times and the circumstances. |
Facts: 'A promises to obtain for 'B' an employment in the public service, and 'B' promises to pay rupees 5.00.000/- to 'A. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: According to the law of trade unions in India, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be maintainable in any civil court against any registered trade union or any officer or member thereof in respect of any act done in contemplation or in furtherance of a trade dispute. |
Facts: Soloman, the Secretary of a registered Trade Union, took a loan from a bank for the higher education of his daughter. Soon after completing the course she was married to an NRI Engineer. Solomon did not repay the loan. The bank demanded the payments from Soloman and warned him that the bank will take suitable legal action against him. Identify the legal position in this regard. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person makes such a statement which lowers other person's reputation in the estimation of other persons, is liable for committing defamation. |
Facts: 'A' writes a letter to 'B' in which he uses abusive language against 'B' and also states that 'B' is a dishonest person. 'A' put the letter in a sealed envelope and delivered it to 'B'. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defense. |
Facts: A, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill 'B'. 'B' to save his life kills 'A'. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: An agreement, the terms of which are not certain, or capable of being made certain, is void. |
Facts: Sunder agreed to take Bhola's penthouse on rent for three years at the rate of rupees 12.00.000/- per annum provided the house was put to thorough repairs and the living rooms were decorated according to contemporary style. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: A master shall be liable for the fraudulent acts of his servants committed in the course of employment. However, the master and third parties must exercise reasonable care in this regard. |
Facts: Rahul was a door to door salesman with United Manufacturing Company (the Company). The Company was manufacturing Water Purifiers. Rahul, along with the company's products, used to carry Water Purifiers manufactured by his cousin in a local Industrial Estate. He used to sell the local product at a lower rate giving the impression to the buyers that he is offering a discount on the company's product. The company management detected the fraudulent activity of Rahul and dismissed him from service. Rahul still continued to carry on with his activity of selling the local product pretending that he was still a salesman of the company. Several customers got cheated in this process. The fraud was noticed by the company when the customers began to complain about the product. The customers demanded the company to compensate their loss. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: According to law, a person is deemed to have attained the age of majority when he completes the age of 18 years, except in the case of a person where a guardian of a minor's person or property has been appointed under the Guardi and Wards Act, 1890 or where the superintendence of a minor's property is assumed by a Court of Wards. Indian law expressly forbids a minor from entering into a contract. Hence, any contract entered into by a minor is void-ab-initio regardless of whether the other party was aware of his minority or not. Further, though a minor is not competent to contract, nothing in the Contract Act prevents him from making the other party bound to the minor. |
Facts: Lal executed a promissory note in favor of Gurudutt, aged 16 years stating that he would pay Gurudutt a sum of Rs. 2 Lakhs when he attains the age of majority. On attaining the age of 18, Gurudutt demanded the amount from Lal, who refused to pay. Gurudutt wants to take legal action against Lal. Identify the most appropriate legal position from the following: |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Section 34 of Indian Penal Code provides that 'When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone'. |
Facts: Three vagabonds, Sanju, Dilbag and Sushil decided to commit burglary. In the night, Sushil opened the lock and they broke into a rich man's house when the entire family was on a pilgrimage. Sanju had gone to that house earlier in connection with some cleaning job. There was only a servant lady in the house. Hearing some sounds from the master bed room, the servant switched on the lights and went up to the room from where she heard the sound. Noticing that the servant was going to cry for help, Sanju grabbed her and covered her mouth with his hands and dragged her into the nearby room. The other two were collecting whatever they could from the room. When they were ready to go out of the house, they looked for Sanju and found him committing rape on the servant. They all left the house and the servant reported the matter to the police and identified Sanju. Subsequently, all three were arrested in connection with the offences of house breaking, burglary and rape. Identify the legal liability of the three. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Assault is causing bodily injury to another person by use of physical force. |
Facts: Rustum while entering into compartment of a train raised his fist in anger towards a person Sheetal, just in front of him in the row, to get way to enter into the train first, but did not hit him. Rustum has: |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: According to section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, 'Industrial dispute means any dispute or difference between employers and employers or between employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labor of any person'. |
Facts: The employees of DK Enterprises met the management and requested half a day leave to allow them to celebrate a lunar eclipse, which was going to happen two days later. The management refused the request. Does this situation amount to an 'industrial dispute'? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using I or possessing the false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing/painting to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually not. |
Facts: David made a living traveling from city to city; selling paintings that he claimed were done by great artists. Since the artists' signatures were in place, many people fell for them and purchased the paintings. One of these artists saw three of his alleged paintings in a City gallery containing his name. He knew these were not his works and he complained to the police. Police traced David and initiated legal proceedings. Is David guilty of any offence? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: The Constitution of India guarantees certain fundamental rights to its citizens. The Constitution also provides that these rights cannot be taken away by state even by a law. For violation of this, the person adversely affected by the law may approach the High Court or the Supreme Court for the issuance of an appropriate writ. One of these rights includes the freedom to form association that implies the right to join an association or not to join such an association. |
Facts: Owing to some industrial disturbances created by XATU, one of the several trade unions in AB Chemicals (Pvt) Ltd., the Company issued a circular to all its employees that as far as possible the employees may disassociate with XATU. Navin is an employee of AB Chemicals and the current General Secretary of XATU. Aggrieved by this circular, which affected the fundamental rights of his and other members of the Union, approaches the High Court of the state for a relief. Identify the most reasonable legal proposition. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person interferes with peaceful possession of another person without the permission of the person in possession of those premises, commits trespass to land. |
Facts: T just walked over the land of 'P' to reach his house as it was a short cut. 'P' had displayed a notice that it is not a thoroughfare. 'P' did not cause any damage to the land. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: A contract would be invalid and unlawful, if the contract is for an immoral or illegal purpose. |
Facts: P was a young and helpless widow, living on the pavement. R, a neighbor gave her a house, registered in her name, on the condition that she should allow R to keep his smuggled goods and drugs in her house. After the registration was done, according to the condition in the contract, R's agents went to keep some packets in her house, she refused. R told her the condition under which the house was given to her. She still refused. Is P justified in her action? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using or possessing the false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually not. |
Facts: John was a publisher of ancient books and papers. In one of his books on the World Wars, he gave photograph of some letters written by famous historic personalities. A researcher in history noted that in the pictures of some of the letters printed in the book, John had added some words or sentences in his own and writing to give completeness to the sentences, so that the readers will get a clear picture of the writer's intention. The researcher challenges the originality of those pictures and claims that the book containing the forged letters should be banned. Examine the validity of the researcher's demand. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Whoever takes away with him any minor less than sixteen years of age if a male, or less than eighteen years of age if a female, out of the custody of parents of such minor without the consent of such parents, is said to commit no offence. |
Facts: 'A, a man, took away a girl below sixteen years to Mumbai without informing the parents of the girl. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Acceptance of a proposal must be absolute and unqualified. |
Facts: 'A made a proposal to sell his motorcycle to 'B' for rupees 25,000/-. 'B' agreed to buy it for rupees 24.000/-. 'A sold his motorcycle to 'C' for 26.000/- the next day. 'B' sues 'A for damages. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: A person is said to do a thing fraudulently, if he does that thing with intent to defraud, but not otherwise. |
Facts: A occasionally hands over his ATM card to 'B' to withdraw money for 'A. On one occasion 'B' without the knowledge of 'A, uses 'As ATM card to find out the balance in as account, but does not withdraw any money. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Where one of the parties to a contract was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party. |
Facts: A doctor asked his patient to make a payment of rupees Ten Lakh for treatment of his fever. The patient paid an amount of rupees Five Lakh and promised to pay the remaining amount after the treatment. After treatment the patient recovered from fever. The doctor demanded the remaining amount from the patient. The patient refused to pay. |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: Negligence is actionable in law. In simple terms, negligence is the failure to take proper care over something. |
Facts: A, a doctor, conducted a hysterectomy sincerely on B and left a small cotton swab inside the abdomen. As a consequence of which B developed some medical problems and had to undergo another surgery is a liable? |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: When a person consented to an act to be done by another, he cannot claim any damages resulting from doing that act, provided the act done is the same for which consent is given. |
Facts: 'P' submitted a written consent to a surgeon 'S' for undergoing a surgical operation for removal of appendicitis. The surgeon while doing surgery also removed the gall bladder of 'A: |
Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those 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 absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. |
Principle: There are legal provisions to give authority to a person to use necessary force against an assailant or wrong-doer for the purpose of protecting one's own body and property as also another's body and property when immediate aid from the state machinery is not readily available; and in so doing he is not answerable in law for his deeds. |
Facts: X, a rich man was taking his morning walk. Due to the threat of robbers in the locality, he was carrying his pistol also. From the opposite direction, another person was coming with a ferocious looking dog. All of a sudden, the dog which was on a chain held by the owner started barking at X. The owner of the dog called the dog to be calm. They crossed each other without any problem. But suddenly, the dog started barking again from a distance. X immediately took out his pistol. By seeing the pistol the dog stopped barking and started walking with the owner. However, X shot at the dog which died instantly. The owner of the dog files a complaint against X, which in due course reached the Magistrate Court. X pleads the right of private defense. |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Legal phrases are followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option: |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the appropriate option in the questions given below. |
A. There is a group of five persons - A, B, C, D and E. |
B. One of them is a Singer, one is a Dancer, one is a Painter, one is a Teacher and one is a Doctor. |
C. Three of themA, C and Doctorprefer rice to chapatti and two of them - B and the Painterprefer chapatti to rice. |
D. The Teacher, D and A are friends to one another but two of these prefer chapatti to rice. |
E. The Singer is Cs brother. |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the appropriate option in the questions given below. |
A. There is a group of five persons - A, B, C, D and E. |
B. One of them is a Singer, one is a Dancer, one is a Painter, one is a Teacher and one is a Doctor. |
C. Three of themA, C and Doctorprefer rice to chapatti and two of them - B and the Painterprefer chapatti to rice. |
D. The Teacher, D and A are friends to one another but two of these prefer chapatti to rice. |
E. The Singer is Cs brother. |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the appropriate option in the questions given below. |
A. There is a group of five persons - A, B, C, D and E. |
B. One of them is a Singer, one is a Dancer, one is a Painter, one is a Teacher and one is a Doctor. |
C. Three of themA, C and Doctorprefer rice to chapatti and two of them - B and the Painterprefer chapatti to rice. |
D. The Teacher, D and A are friends to one another but two of these prefer chapatti to rice. |
E. The Singer is Cs brother. |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the most appropriate option in the questions given below |
A. Six flats on a floor in two rows facing north and south are allotted to P, O, R, S, T and U. |
B. Q gets a north-facing flat and is not next to S. |
C. S and U get diagonally opposite flats. |
D. R, next to U gets a south-facing flat and T gets a north-facing flat. |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the most appropriate option in the questions given below |
A. Six flats on a floor in two rows facing north and south are allotted to P, O, R, S, T and U. |
B. Q gets a north-facing flat and is not next to S. |
C. S and U get diagonally opposite flats. |
D. R, next to U gets a south-facing flat and T gets a north-facing flat. |
Direction: Read the following information carefully and choose the most appropriate option in the questions given below |
A. Six flats on a floor in two rows facing north and south are allotted to P, O, R, S, T and U. |
B. Q gets a north-facing flat and is not next to S. |
C. S and U get diagonally opposite flats. |
D. R, next to U gets a south-facing flat and T gets a north-facing flat. |
Direction: Which alternative applies to the following Statement or Assumptions? Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Which alternative applies to the following Statement or Assumptions? Choose the most appropriate option. |
Direction: Find the odd one out from the following: |
Direction: Find the odd one out from the following: |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
Direction: Choose the most appropriate option for each of the following questions. |
You need to login to perform this action.
You will be redirected in
3 sec