In Hall v. Hebert, an individual was severely injured when he allowed his intoxicated friend to drive his car. The Supreme Court of Canada had to deal with whether volenti non fit injuria would apply. What did the Court hold?
A) The plaintiff assumed neither the physical risk nor the legal risk in the circumstances.
B) The plaintiff assumed only the legal risk, but this is all that is required for volenti non fit injuria to apply.
C) The plaintiff assumed only the physical risk, but this is all that is required for volenti non fit injuria to apply.
D) The plaintiff assumed the physical risk, but there was no indication he had assumed the legal risk as well.
E) The plaintiff assumed the legal risk, but there was no indication he had assumed the physical risk as well.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q8: In which of the following cases is
Q9: Raheel wants to sue a manufacturer who
Q10: Which of the following is true with
Q11: Creative Farming Ltd. manufactures fertilizer from organic
Q12: Which of the following situations could not
Q14: Because of the North American Free Trade
Q15: The provincial government thought that the only
Q16: A seven-year-old boy followed his dog into
Q17: You and your friend recently bought a
Q18: Which of the following statements with regard
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents