Tort Distinguished from Crime and Breach of Contract — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. A tort is described as a wrong against:

   • The State and society at large
   • A private individual (correct answer)
   • Both the State and an individual equally
   • No one in particular

   Explanation. A tort is a private wrong, an infringement of the rights of an individual, unlike a crime which is a public wrong.

2. In a criminal case in India, the case is typically brought in the name of:

   • The victim
   • The State (correct answer)
   • The accused's employer
   • The local municipality

   Explanation. The State prosecutes a crime, and in serious cases the victim cannot simply withdraw the case. In a tort the injured person sues and may settle.

3. The standard of proof in a civil tort claim is:

   • Beyond reasonable doubt
   • Balance of probabilities (correct answer)
   • Absolute certainty
   • No proof required

   Explanation. Civil tort claims are decided on the balance of probabilities, a lower standard than the criminal "beyond reasonable doubt."

4. In contract, a duty is owed to:

   • Persons generally
   • Only the other contracting party (privity) (correct answer)
   • The State
   • Any third party who benefits

   Explanation. Contractual duties arise from agreement and, under the privity rule, are generally owed only to the other party to the contract.

5. Which of the following best distinguishes tort damages from contract damages?

   • Tort damages are always higher
   • Tort damages aim to restore the plaintiff to where he was before the wrong; contract damages aim to put him where he would have been had the promise been kept (correct answer)
   • Tort damages require a written agreement
   • Contract damages are never awarded by courts

   Explanation. Tort damages aim to put the plaintiff back where he was before the wrong. Contract damages aim to put him where he would have been if the promise had been kept. Both are usually fixed by the court, unless the parties agreed a sum in advance (section 74).

6. In White v. John Warwick & Co. Ltd. (1953), the plaintiff was allowed to frame his claim in tort because:

   • The contract was void from the start
   • The duty not to be negligent exists independently of the contract (correct answer)
   • There was no contract at all between the parties
   • The exemption clause was illegal

   Explanation. Denning L.J. held that the claim in negligence was founded in tort and not on the contract. The same facts gave a contract claim and a tort claim, and the exemption clause did not clearly cover negligence.

7. A quasi-contract is best described as:

   • A verbal contract only
   • A law-imposed obligation to prevent unjust enrichment (correct answer)
   • A tort committed during contract negotiations
   • A contract signed under duress

   Explanation. A quasi-contract is neither a true contract nor a tort — it is an obligation the law imposes to prevent unjust enrichment.

8. Which of these can happen when the same act is both a tort and a crime?

   • Only the criminal case can proceed
   • Only the civil case can proceed
   • Both proceedings can proceed independently of each other (correct answer)
   • Neither case can be filed

   Explanation. The State's criminal prosecution and the victim's civil tort suit are independent — one does not bar the other.