Faye is a wildlife expert who works for a major zoo.Because her love of animals does not end when she leaves work each night, she has a number of exotic pets in her home, including a small capuchin monkey that she calls Kong.Unfortunately, although Kong had no history of violent behaviour, he viciously attacked a door-to-door canvasser named Ray who rang Faye's doorbell one evening.Which of the following statements is TRUE?
A) Under the traditional common law rules, Faye cannot be held liable because Kong had not previously bitten anyone.
B) Because the common law imposes unlimited and absolute liability on anyone who has control of a wild animal, Faye will be held liable for Ray's injuries and there are no defences that are available to her.
C) Faye cannot be held liable unless the court is satisfied that she either carelessly controlled Kong or intentionally caused Kong to attack Ray.
D) Even if she would otherwise be held strictly liable for Ray's injuries, Faye may escape liability under the defence of consent if she proves that, before ringing the doorbell, Ray freely chose to accept the risk of injury despite reading a sign that provided a clear warning about the wild animals in the house and told people to stay away.
E) Liability for wild animals is a type of intentional tort.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q49: Which of the following statements is TRUE?
Q50: Which of the following torts fall within
Q51: Eve is very angry about an incident
Q52: Bentham Inc sued Locke Ltd in tort.The
Q53: Rawls Inc.sued Nozick Ltd.in tort.The court awarded
Q55: Case Brief 3.2 discusses the Supreme Court
Q56: Maria intends to create a new business,
Q57: Jojo suffered a catastrophic injury while she
Q58: Miriam worked as a financial advisor with
Q59: Omega Inc purchased a liability insurance policy
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