Question

The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.

Assertion (A): No action lies for more damage caused by some act that does not violate a legal right.
Reason (R): An action lies for interference with another's legal right even where it causes no actual damage.

Options

• Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation  of A

• Both A and R are true but R is not the true explanation of A 

• A is true but R is false

• A is false but R is true

Answer 1

Both A and R are true but R is not the true explanation  of A 

Explanation:

Both A and R are true but R is not the true explanation of A. damnum sine injuria (Anand Singh v Ram Chandra AIR 1953 28) is the converse of injuria sine damno (ashby v white (1703) 2 Lord Rayam 938). In some cases the loss is not actionable in tort (damnum sine injuria), conversely, there are cases in which an act is actionable although it has caused no loss at all (injuria sine damno). No action lies for more damage, however substantial, caused by some act which does not violate a legal right but that an action does lie in certain cases of interference with another's a legal private right, even where it causes no actual damage. example: a trespass. There may certain legal wrongs which may cause no loss or damage to another, yet the law provides a legal remedy although there is only a violation of private legal right.