Legal Reasoning Passage Based Practice Questions

Legal Reasoning Passage Based Practice Questions

Passage 1

Source: (https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/judicial-law/)

Experts have their own battle and concept of ideas in the arena of court proceedings. All of them have with familiarity, knowledge, understanding and skills to provide a great attack in the court proceedings. Experts are appointed in to two different parties and choose the best point-of-views in the issue. The jurors permit to call the opposing parties their own experts and in practice, the actions or the degree of expertise is highly required with the technical or scientific training. The other experts are free to comment on the other party’s report, but the ultimate control over the procedure retains in the tribunal.​​ The person involved in the court process and their opinion must be entirely of partially based on their scope of knowledge. Experts’ one function is to distinguish the opinions from the fact on which the evidences are based. The report of an expert must establish a solid reasoning of information in which it will be judges as accepted or rejected. Solely, the role of an expert is based on her or his own knowledge and not from the opinion of others.​​ With despite to the issues of adversarial bias, the proposal for its elimination is welcome since it doesn’t play any useful role in expert investigations. But in truth, the system cannot eliminate all the existing bias because the opposing bias pertinent to the experts who is an allied in to either party may be affected their own theory of bias.​​ On the other hand, experts of the opposing parties are provided their equal rights to cross examine and criticize the admissibility of the evidences presented in court proceeding. For some expert opinions, the use of bias is an added motivational factor that helps establish advantage against the opposing party.​​ The ground of adversarial system is the subject in the danger of bias. Experts prepared their best position in the case, thus leading them to do further bias during the process. The particular evidences where presented and with the court proceedings, are subject to the cross examination. The relevant information might be distorted and this might alter the decision of the jurors. The advantage of the arbitration in International disputes has been stated and pointed out that it offers hope of reducing the biases and the prospect of parallel lawsuits in different countries.​​ Adversarial system promotes consensus judgment but is also​​ plagued with many challenges. Expert evidence’s has its worse quality in inquisitorial systems because it is infrequently challenged by the defence. Notably, the other system, such as the French system, might work better if​​ the lawyer on the side of defence questions the expert evidence more vigorously, but it is indeed difficult to change one element of the system in other way. The inquisitional set-up seems to promote a culture in which the​​ defence does not play a very active role.​​ A role of an expert in the adversarial system has its own code of practice. The precise role and responsibilities should be clarified. The lack of clear standards also leave experts are open to the manipulation by lawyers and the strong foundation of the adversarial bias.

Questions

  • Who can produce experts in the court proceeding?

  • Prosecution

  • Defence

  • Judge

  • All the above

Ans. d

Rationale:​​ Experts are appointed in to two different parties and choose the best point-of-views in the issue. The jurors permit to call the opposing parties their own experts and in practice, the actions or the degree of expertise is highly required with the technical or scientific training.

  • Which one of the following is the major reason for taking expert evidence?

  • To know the exact facts of the case

  • Distinguish the opinions from the fact on which the evidences are based.

  • To determine scientific impact on the case

  • All the above

Ans. b

Rationale:​​ Experts’ one function is to distinguish the opinions from the fact on which the evidences are based.

  • An expert of handwriting affirms that the writing on the forged document is of the accused only as the same was told to the expert accused’s best friend. Decide

  • The evidence of expert shall be admissible as his expertise cannot be questioned

  • The evidence of expert is admissible irrespective of anything

  • The evidence of expert is not admissible as it is based on opinion of others

  • The evidence of expert is not admissible as he himself did not see the accused writing

Ans. c

Rationale:​​ the role of an expert is based on her or his own knowledge and not from the opinion of others

  • What do you understand by the adversarial system?

  • The system where one party is bias against other

  • The system where judge actively takes part in determining the truth

  • The system where judge favours one party over the other

  • The system where judge acts as an impartial referee

Ans. d

Rationale:​​ An inquisitorial system is a legal system in which the court, or a part of the court, is actively involved in investigating the facts of the case. This is distinct from an adversarial system, in which the role of the court is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecution and the defence.

  • Under which of the following systems defence play an active role?

  • Inquisitorial

  • Adversarial

  • Both a and b

  • None of the above

Ans. b

Rationale:​​ The inquisitional set-up seems to promote a culture in which the​​ defence does not play a very active role.

Passage 2

Source: (https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/judicial-law/)

Most civil cases deal with contracts, or promissory notes etc. which are not matters that involve reckless wrongdoing, or morally reprehensive conduct, in a majority of cases, the subject matter is irrelevant to the character of persons so it is never accepted as evidence. Character evidence is thus accepted only in situations where the facts show that it is relevant.​​ Though the test appears to be relevancy, there are several civil cases where the character of a person becomes relevant and yet character evidence is excluded. For example in tortuous claim against assault or negligence, the good character of the defendant would be​​ relevant, yet character evidence is not accepted in tortuous claims while it is accepted in criminal actions for the same offences of assault or negligence.​​ Similarly, in quasi criminal cases, where features belonging to classes of action can be found, civil courts do not entertain character evidence even if it could be accepted in a criminal court for the same offence. Likewise it is seen that when criminal charges are involved in a civil suit character​​ evidence is not admissible.​​ One of the reasons for this in both India as well as England is stated to be a policy decision in order to restrain civil proceedings within manageable limits and prevent protracted legal proceedings. It is said that such a move has been made in order to prevent unfairness to civil litigants as they cannot be expected, to protect themselves against allegations of bad character which may range over their whole life. However this reasoning should hold good for criminal cases as well, as character evidence in criminal cases may also involve imputations which may range throughout one’s life. The reason for allowing for character evidence, here may be because of the fact that the repercussions of a criminal trial are different from that of a civil case. Criminal cases involve the possibility of imprisonment. For example, the Indian Penal Code provides imprisonment of three months for assault without grave and sudden provocation. While a tortious claim against assault will only result in damages. This might be one of the reasons behind admitting character evidence in criminal cases.​​ Character Evidence When Admissible-​​ Thus we can see that character evidence in civil cases is admissible when​​ the character of the party or third party is a fact in issue​​ the character of the party or third party becomes relevant from the facts of the case, that is when it is needed as circumstantial evidence to prove another fact in issue.​​ The character of a witness is in question.

Questions

  • Remedy against the offence of assault can be claimed under

  • Law of Tort

  • Indian Penal Code

  • Both a and b

  • None of the above

Ans. c

Rationale:​​ in tortuous claim against assault or negligence, the good character of the defendant would be relevant, yet character evidence is not accepted in tortuous claims while it is accepted in criminal actions for the same offences of assault or negligence.

  • Whether character evidence​​ is​​ admissible in a civil suit from criminal action?

  • Yes

  • No

  • May be

  • Not sure

Ans. b

Rationale:​​ when criminal charges are involved in civil suit character​​ evidence is not admissible.

  • Why is character evidence not admissible in civil cases

  • In civil cases the society at large is not effected thus it is unfair that the accused should carry a bad image for the rest of his life

  • In civil cases the society at large is effected thus it is unfair that the accused should carry a bad image for the rest of his life

  • In civil cases the society at large is not effected thus it is fair that the accused should carry a bad image for the rest of his life

  • In civil cases the society at large is effected thus it is fair that the accused should carry a bad image for the rest of his life

Ans. a

Rationale:​​ One of the reasons for this in both India as well as England is stated to be a policy decision in order to restrain civil proceedings within manageable limits and prevent protracted legal proceedings. It is said that such a move has been made in order to prevent unfairness to civil litigants as they cannot be expected, to protect themselves against allegations of bad character which may range over their whole life.

  • Under Indian Penal Code for offence of assault, what is the prescribed punishment?

  • 3 years​​ 

  • 2 years

  • 3 months

  • 2 months

Ans. c

Rationale:​​ the Indian Penal Code provides imprisonment of three months for assault without grave and sudden provocation.

  • What is the punishment prescribed for the offence of assault under Law of Tort?

  • 3 months imprisonment​​ 

  • Damages

  • Both a and b

  • Only a

Ans. b

Rationale:​​ a tortious claim against assault will only result in damages.

 

 

 

 

Read to know All About CLAT 2020

Read our previous post on offences against property under ipc here.

Take our test on offences against property under ipc here.

Read our post on the Landmark Judgements of 2019-2020.

Read our post on Elements of Crime.

Read CLATapult’s post on offer and acceptance here. Also, try their mocks for more legal reasoning practice questions

Got doubts about CLAT 2020? Find all your answers and much more here.

Get CLATalogue' Posts in Your Inbox