LEGAL APTITUDE
Below Question consist of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as ‘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 answering 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 answer a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
1. 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 January 1, 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 December 31, 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 January 1, 2017. Mr. Martin wants to claim the Car. Will he succeed?
(a) No. The Soap Company has not entered into a contract with Mr. Martin as he was not in India on January 1, 2017 when the advertisement was published.
(b) The Hotel Manager who could legally claim the Car as he was the one actually purchased the soap for the use in the Hotel.
(c) No. Actual intention of the Company was to promote the sale of the Soap.
(d) Mr. Martin obtained the Key before the stipulated date from the Soap Bar. So he is covered by the offer of the Soap Company and can claim the car.
2. Principle: According to law, a person who find 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 transfer 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.
(a) P was requesting the film star for the actual expenditure incurred by him before returning the Necklace. This request is legally sustainable
(b) As the film star had notified in the newspaper, P ought to have read it and contacted her instead of publishing another notification. So he cannot claim any compensation
(c) As it was wrong on the part of P to bargain over a property belonging to a celebrity and he should have accepted some gift which might have been given by the film star and returned the Necklace instead of threatening her that he would sell it
(d) The film star was right in refusing P, as she did not offer any reward for anyone who would return the Necklace.
