Legality Of Object & Consideration
-
All agreement are contracts if they are made
-
For lawful consideration only
-
With lawful object irrespective of the legality of consideration
-
For lawful consideration irrespective of the legality of object
-
For lawful consideration as well as with lawful object
-
No. Of Questions to be Answered : Random 20 out of 58
Quiz Preview
- 2.
Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful, is ___________.
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
Wager.
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement is considered void if its object or consideration is unlawful. This means that the agreement has no legal effect and cannot be enforced by either party. Void agreements are essentially invalid from the beginning and are treated as if they never existed.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
The provision regarding the legality of object and consideration is emphasized in
-
Section 10
-
Section 23
-
Both (a) and (b)
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. Both (a) and (b)Explanation
Both Section 10 and Section 23 emphasize the legality of object and consideration. Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act states that an agreement becomes void if its object or consideration is unlawful. Section 23 further elaborates on this by stating that any agreement with an unlawful object or consideration is void. Therefore, both sections highlight the importance of ensuring that the object and consideration of a contract are legal.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
All agreements are contracts only if they are made for lawful consideration and with lawful object. It is emphasized in
-
Section 10
-
Section 23
-
Both (a) and (b)
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Section 10Explanation
Section 10 of the law emphasizes that all agreements are considered contracts if they are made for lawful consideration and have a lawful object. This means that for an agreement to be legally binding, there must be a valid exchange of something of value (consideration) and the purpose of the agreement must not be illegal or against public policy. Therefore, Section 10 is the correct answer as it directly relates to the requirement for an agreement to be considered a contract.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
An agreement for lawful consideration is void. It is emphasized in
-
Section 10
-
Section 23
-
Both (a) and (b)
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Section 23Explanation
Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act states that an agreement is considered void if it is against public policy or involves unlawful consideration. Therefore, the correct answer is Section 23, as it specifically mentions the voidness of agreements for lawful consideration.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
An agreement for lawful consideration but with an unlawful object, is
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Wager
-
Partially illegal
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement for lawful consideration but with an unlawful object is considered void. This means that the agreement is not legally enforceable and has no legal effect. It is essentially treated as if it never existed in the eyes of the law.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
An agreement with lawful object but for an unlawful consideration, is ________________.
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Wager
-
Partially unlawful
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement with lawful object but for an unlawful consideration is considered void. This means that the agreement is completely unenforceable and has no legal effect. Both parties are not bound by the terms of the agreement, and any actions taken based on it would not be legally recognized.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
The definition of both the unlawful object and unlawful consideration is given in
-
Section 10
-
Section 23
-
Both (a) and (b)
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Section 23Explanation
Section 23 of the given text provides the definition for both the unlawful object and unlawful consideration. This section specifically outlines the conditions under which an agreement is considered void if the object or consideration is unlawful. Therefore, the correct answer is Section 23.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
The consideration or object of an agreement is considered unlawful where it is (i) forbidden by law (ii) fraudulent (iii) immoral (iv) inadequate,
-
(i), (ii), (iii), (iv)
-
(ii), (iii), (iv)
-
(i), (ii), (iv)
-
(i) (ii), (iii).
Correct Answer
A. (i) (ii), (iii).Explanation
The correct answer is (i) (ii), (iii). The explanation for this answer is that an agreement is considered unlawful if the consideration or object of the agreement is forbidden by law, fraudulent, or immoral. This means that if any of these conditions are present, the agreement would be considered unlawful. The option (i) (ii), (iii) includes all the correct conditions, making it the correct answer.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
In which of the following case, the consideration or object of an agreement is not considered unlawful?
-
Where it is opposed to public policy
-
Where it defeats the provision of any law
-
Where it is not as per the requirement of promisee
-
Where it is injurious to another person or his property.
Correct Answer
A. Where it is not as per the requirement of promiseeExplanation
An agreement is not considered unlawful when the consideration or object of the agreement is not as per the requirement of the promisee. This means that if the promisee does not receive what they were expecting or what was promised to them, it does not make the agreement unlawful. However, it is important to note that this does not apply to cases where the agreement is opposed to public policy, defeats the provision of any law, or is injurious to another person or their property.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
The cases in which the object or consideration is considered unlawful, are provided in
-
Where it is opposed to public policy
-
Where it defeats the provision of any law
-
Where it is not as per the requirements of promisee
-
Where it is injurious to another person or his property
Correct Answer
A. Where it defeats the provision of any lawExplanation
The correct answer is "Where it defeats the provision of any law". This means that if the object or consideration of a contract goes against any existing law, it is considered unlawful. This is because a contract should not be used to undermine or violate the laws that are in place to protect individuals and society as a whole.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
In which of the following cases, the object or consideration of an agreement is considered unlawful ?
-
Where it is forbidden by law
-
Where it is fraudulent
-
Where it is immoral
-
All of the above
Correct Answer
A. All of the aboveExplanation
The object or consideration of an agreement is considered unlawful in all of the above cases. If the object or consideration is forbidden by law, it means that it is prohibited by the legal system and therefore cannot be a valid part of the agreement. If the object or consideration is fraudulent, it means that it involves deceit or dishonesty, which is also unlawful. Similarly, if the object or consideration is immoral, it goes against accepted moral standards and is therefore considered unlawful.Rate this question:
-
- 13.
In which of the following cases the object or consideration of an agreement it not unlawful?
-
Where it is not opposed to public property
-
Where it does not defeat the provision of any law
-
Where it is injurious to another person or his property
-
Both (a) and (b).
Correct Answer
A. Both (a) and (b).Explanation
The correct answer is "Both (a) and (b)." In this case, the object or consideration of an agreement is not unlawful if it is not opposed to public policy and does not defeat the provision of any law. This means that as long as the agreement does not go against public interests or violate any legal provisions, it is considered lawful.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
Where the object or consideration of an agreement is forbidden by law, the agreement is
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
Illegal
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
When the object or consideration of an agreement is forbidden by law, the agreement is considered void. This means that the agreement is null and has no legal effect. Void agreements are essentially invalid from the beginning and cannot be enforced by either party.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
A agrees to Ra 5 lakhs to B if he (B) procures an employment for A in Income Tax Department. The agreement is
-
Valid
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Contingent
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
The agreement is void because it is based on an illegal consideration. The offeror, A, is offering a bribe to B in exchange for securing employment in the Income Tax Department. This is against the law and goes against public policy. Therefore, the agreement is considered void and unenforceable.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
A agrees to pay Rs. 2 lakh to B if he kills C. The agreement is
-
Valid
-
Voidable
-
Void
-
Wagering
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
The agreement is considered void because it involves an illegal act, which is the act of killing another person. Any agreement that involves an illegal activity is not enforceable by law and is therefore void.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
Where the object or consideration of an agreement is not directly forbidden by law, but is of such a nature that if permitted. It would defeat the provision of any law, the agreement is
-
Contingent
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
Void
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement is considered void when its object or consideration is not directly prohibited by law but is of such a nature that if allowed, it would defeat the provisions of any law. In other words, the agreement goes against the fundamental principles of law and is therefore considered null and void.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
A agrees to pay Rs. 25,000 to B if he becomes surety for A in a criminal case pending in the court of law. This agreement is
-
Void
-
Valid
-
Allowed
-
Contingent
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
This agreement is void because it involves an illegal act. Surety for a criminal case implies supporting someone who is involved in a crime, which goes against the law. Any agreement that involves illegal activities or is against public policy is considered void and unenforceable by the court.Rate this question:
-
- 19.
Where the object or consideration of an agreement is fraudulent, the agreement is
-
Valid
-
Void
-
Fraudulent
-
Voidable
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
When the object or consideration of an agreement is fraudulent, the agreement is considered void. This means that the agreement is not legally binding and has no legal effect. Void agreements are essentially treated as if they never existed in the eyes of the law.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
A,B and C entered into an agreement to carry on some fraudulent, business and to share the profit in equal shares. This agreement is
-
Valid
-
Voidable
-
Void
-
Fraudulent
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
The agreement between A, B, and C to carry on fraudulent business and share the profits equally is considered void. This means that the agreement is not legally binding and has no legal effect. Void agreements are typically against public policy or involve illegal activities. In this case, the fraudulent nature of the agreement renders it void, as it goes against the principles of honesty and fair dealing in business transactions.Rate this question:
-
- 21.
An agreement to commit a crime or any wrongful act for which a civil suit can be brought is
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement to commit a crime or any wrongful act for which a civil suit can be brought is considered void. This means that such an agreement is not legally binding and has no legal effect. It is against the law to enter into an agreement that involves illegal activities or actions that can result in civil liability. Therefore, the correct answer is Void.Rate this question:
-
- 22.
Where the object or consideration of an agreement is regarded as immoral, the agreement is
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Restricted
-
Valid
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
When the object or consideration of an agreement is considered immoral, the agreement is void. This means that the agreement is considered invalid and has no legal effect. Immoral objects or considerations are those that are against public policy or involve illegal activities. Therefore, any agreement with such a purpose is not recognized by the law and cannot be enforced.Rate this question:
-
- 23.
A agreed, for some money, to give her daughter for concubine to B. The agreement is
-
Valid
-
Voidable
-
Restricted
-
Void
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
The agreement is void because it involves the exchange of money for the daughter to be given as a concubine. This arrangement is illegal and against public policy as it goes against the principles of consent, dignity, and equality. It is considered morally and legally unacceptable, rendering the agreement null and void.Rate this question:
-
- 24.
Which of the following type of agreement are void being regarded as immoral ?
-
Agreement interfering with marital relations.
-
Agreement to marry a woman after the death of her husband or after she seeks divorce.
-
Agreement with prostitutes.
-
All of the above are regarded as immoral, thus void.
Correct Answer
A. All of the above are regarded as immoral, thus void.Explanation
The given answer states that all of the mentioned types of agreements are considered immoral and therefore void. This means that any agreement that interferes with marital relations, an agreement to marry a woman after the death of her husband or after she seeks divorce, and an agreement with prostitutes are all regarded as immoral and thus cannot be legally enforced.Rate this question:
-
- 25.
Where the object or consideration of an agreement is opposed to public policy, the agreement is
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
When the object or consideration of an agreement is opposed to public policy, the agreement is considered void. This means that the agreement is not legally binding or enforceable. Public policy refers to the principles and standards that are considered to be in the best interest of society as a whole. If an agreement goes against these principles, it is deemed to be against public policy and therefore void.Rate this question:
-
- 26.
An agreement said to be opposed to public policy when it.
-
Is injurious to the welfare of the society.
-
Tends to prejudice the welfare of the society.
-
Either (a) or (b)
-
Is against provision of any law
Correct Answer
A. Either (a) or (b)Explanation
An agreement is considered to be opposed to public policy when it is either injurious to the welfare of society or tends to prejudice the welfare of society. This means that if an agreement is found to be harmful or detrimental to the well-being of the general public or goes against the provisions of any law, it can be deemed as opposed to public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 27.
An agreement opposed to public polity is ______________
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement opposed to public policy is considered void. This means that it is not legally enforceable and has no legal effect. Such agreements are against the principles and interests of the public and are therefore deemed invalid by the courts.Rate this question:
-
- 28.
Which of the following is not covered by heads of public policy?
-
Trading with an enemy
-
Contracts to do impossible acts
-
Trafficking in public offices
-
Marriage brokerage contracts
Correct Answer
A. Contracts to do impossible actsExplanation
Contracts to do impossible acts are not covered by heads of public policy. This means that such contracts are not enforceable by law because they involve agreements to perform actions that are impossible to accomplish. The heads of public policy are a set of principles that guide the legal system and determine which contracts are considered valid and enforceable. These principles aim to protect the public interest and ensure fairness and justice in contractual agreements. Since contracts to do impossible acts are inherently unachievable, they are not recognized under the heads of public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 29.
Which of the following agreements do not fall in the category of agreements opposed to public policy?
-
Agreement to commit a crime.
-
Agreement restricting personal liberty.
-
Agreement in restraint of parental right.
-
Agreement of wagering nature.
Correct Answer
A. Agreement of wagering nature.Explanation
An agreement of wagering nature does not fall in the category of agreements opposed to public policy. While agreements to commit a crime, restrict personal liberty, and restrain parental rights are all considered against public policy, wagering agreements are not inherently illegal. They involve placing bets or wagers on uncertain events, and while they may be regulated by specific laws, they are not considered against public policy as long as they comply with those regulations.Rate this question:
-
- 30.
An agreement intended to induce a government officer to act corruptly, is
-
Void being against public policy.
-
Voidable being involving corrupt practices only.
-
Valid being made according to routine corrupt practices.
-
Enforceable with the permission of government.
Correct Answer
A. Void being against public policy.Explanation
The correct answer is "Void being against public policy." This means that an agreement intended to induce a government officer to act corruptly is considered void because it goes against public policy. Public policy aims to promote the common good and prevent actions that are harmful or unethical. Therefore, any agreement that encourages corruption by government officials is not legally enforceable and is considered void.Rate this question:
-
- 31.
An agreement for the procurement of a public recognition such as Param Veer Chakra or any other title for monetary or other consideration is
-
A quasi contract
-
Contingent contract
-
Opposed to public
-
Not opposed to public policy
Correct Answer
A. Opposed to publicExplanation
The agreement for the procurement of a public recognition such as Param Veer Chakra or any other title for monetary or other consideration is considered to be opposed to public policy. This means that such agreements are not in line with the principles and values that are deemed beneficial for the general public. Engaging in such agreements can be seen as unethical and against the public interest.Rate this question:
-
- 32.
Which of the following statements are correct? (a) An agreement with voters to procure their votes for monetary consideration is void. (b) An agreement with a person for procuring a seat in a college for monetary consideration is void. (c) An agreement by way of wager is voidable. (d) An agreement restricting personal liberty is void.
-
( i ) (ii), (iii)
-
(ii), (iii), (iv)
-
(i), ( ii), (iv)
-
(ii), (iii), (iv).
Correct Answer
A. (i), ( ii), (iv)Explanation
Statement (a) is correct because an agreement with voters to procure their votes for monetary consideration is against public policy and therefore void. Statement (b) is also correct because an agreement to procure a seat in a college for monetary consideration is also against public policy and void. Statement (c) is incorrect because an agreement by way of wager is not voidable, it is void. Statement (d) is correct because an agreement restricting personal liberty is against public policy and therefore void.Rate this question:
-
- 33.
An agreement which interferes with the administration of justice is opposed to public policy. Which of the following agreements fall in this category?
-
An agreement which obstructs the ordinary course of a justice
-
An agreement for stifling prosecution
-
A champertous agreement with malafide intention
-
All of the above.
Correct Answer
A. All of the above.Explanation
All of the options mentioned in the question fall under the category of agreements that interfere with the administration of justice and are opposed to public policy. An agreement that obstructs the ordinary course of justice hinders the smooth functioning of the judicial system. An agreement for stifling prosecution implies an attempt to prevent legal action against someone, which can impede the fair administration of justice. A champertous agreement refers to an arrangement where a third party funds a lawsuit in exchange for a share in the proceeds, which can have a malicious intention and disrupt the fairness of the legal process. Therefore, all the options mentioned are agreements that interfere with the administration of justice.Rate this question:
-
- 34.
A agrees to pay Rs. 50,000 to B if he gives false evidence in his favour in case pending against him in a court of law. The agreement is
-
Valid as such agreements are usually make and are recognised by courts
-
Void as it interferes with administration and thus opposed to public policy
-
Enforceable after seeking permission of the court
-
Conditional depending upon the decision of the case
Correct Answer
A. Void as it interferes with administration and thus opposed to public policyExplanation
The agreement is void as it interferes with the administration of justice and is opposed to public policy. Agreements that involve giving false evidence in a court of law are considered illegal and against the principles of justice. Such agreements undermine the integrity of the legal system and are therefore not recognized or enforceable by courts.Rate this question:
-
- 35.
An agreement not to prosecute an offender or to withdraw a pending prosecution is void. And is known as the agreement for
-
Known as the agreement
-
Champerty
-
Stifling prosecution
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Stifling prosecutionExplanation
The given correct answer is "Stifling prosecution." This is because the statement mentioned in the question states that an agreement not to prosecute or withdraw a pending prosecution is void. Therefore, an agreement that aims to prevent or hinder the prosecution of an offender is known as "stifling prosecution." Champerty refers to an agreement where a third party funds a lawsuit in exchange for a share of the proceeds, and none of these options align with the given statement.Rate this question:
-
- 36.
An agreement, to give assistance (monetary or otherwise) to another person to recover property by legal action and a to share the proceed of litigation, is known as
-
Champertous agreement
-
Stifling prosecution
-
Maintenance agreement
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. Champertous agreementExplanation
A champertous agreement refers to an agreement where one party provides assistance, whether it be financial or other forms of support, to another person in order to recover property through legal action. Additionally, the agreement stipulates that the proceeds from the litigation will be shared between the parties involved. This practice is generally considered illegal and unethical in most jurisdictions, as it encourages unnecessary litigation and can lead to conflicts of interest.Rate this question:
-
- 37.
A champertous agreement which is fair and made with bana fide object of assisting a person is valid
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
A champertous agreement refers to an agreement where a third party provides financial assistance to someone in a legal dispute in exchange for a share of the proceeds if the case is successful. In this context, if the agreement is fair and made with a bona fide (genuine) intention of helping the person, it is considered valid. This means that such agreements can be legally enforceable and recognized by the court. Therefore, the statement "A champertous agreement which is fair and made with a bona fide object of assisting a person is valid" is true.Rate this question:
-
- 38.
An agreement to pay the lawyer according to the results of the case is against public policy,
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
An agreement to pay the lawyer according to the results of the case is against public policy because it can create a conflict of interest. If a lawyer's payment is contingent on the outcome of the case, they may be tempted to prioritize their own financial gain over the best interests of their client. This arrangement can compromise the lawyer's ethical obligations and the integrity of the legal system. Therefore, it is generally considered against public policy to have such agreements in place.Rate this question:
-
- 39.
An agreement to procure the marriage of a person in consideration of money is
-
Called a marriage a brokerage contract
-
Against the public policy
-
Valid and enforceable
-
Both (a) and (b).
Correct Answer
A. Both (a) and (b).Explanation
The correct answer is "Both (a) and (b)." This means that an agreement to procure the marriage of a person in consideration of money is both called a marriage brokerage contract and against public policy. This implies that such agreements are not valid and enforceable as they go against the principles of public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 40.
Which of the following agreements is void as being opposed to public policy?
-
An agreement to indemnify a person against consequences of his criminal act.
-
An agreement by a father to transfer the guardianship of his minor son to a third person
-
An agreement which restricts the personal liberty of an individual
-
All the above are void being opposed to public policy
Correct Answer
A. All the above are void being opposed to public policyExplanation
All the above agreements are considered void as they are against public policy. An agreement to indemnify a person against the consequences of their criminal act goes against the principles of justice and encourages unlawful behavior. An agreement by a father to transfer the guardianship of his minor son to a third person may not be in the best interest of the child and goes against the welfare of the minor. Lastly, an agreement that restricts the personal liberty of an individual violates their fundamental rights and freedoms. Therefore, all these agreements are void as they are contrary to public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 41.
Agreements (a) in restraint of marriage, (b) in restraint of legal proceeding and (c) in restraint of trade have been expressly declared to be void by the Indian Contract Act. Do they also fall in the category of agreements opposed to public policy?
-
Yes
-
No
Correct Answer
A. YesExplanation
Agreements in restraint of marriage, legal proceedings, and trade have been declared void by the Indian Contract Act. These agreements are against public policy because they restrict individuals' freedom to marry, access legal remedies, and engage in trade. Such restrictions are considered detrimental to the overall welfare and interest of society. Therefore, these agreements not only fall under the category of void agreements but also agreements opposed to public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 42.
An agreement is void if it is opposed to public policy. Which of the following is not covered by heads of public policy?
-
Trading with an enemy.
-
Trafficking in public offices.
-
Marriage brokerage contract.
-
Contracts to do impossible act
Correct Answer
A. Contracts to do impossible actExplanation
Contracts to do impossible acts are not covered by heads of public policy. This means that even if an agreement is impossible to perform, it does not necessarily make it void on the grounds of public policy. Public policy typically focuses on agreements that are against the general welfare and well-being of society, such as trading with an enemy or trafficking in public offices. Marriage brokerage contracts may also be considered against public policy depending on the jurisdiction. However, contracts to do impossible acts are not inherently against public policy as they do not involve any moral or societal concerns.Rate this question:
-
- 43.
Which of the following agreements fall in the category of agreements opposed to public policy?
-
Agreements to defraud creditors
-
Agreements is restraint of legal proceedings.
-
Agreements in restraint of trade
-
All of these
Correct Answer
A. All of theseExplanation
All of the given agreements fall in the category of agreements opposed to public policy. Agreements to defraud creditors involve intentionally deceiving creditors to avoid paying debts, which is against the principles of fairness and honesty. Agreements in restraint of legal proceedings aim to prevent individuals from seeking legal remedies, undermining the justice system. Agreements in restraint of trade restrict individuals from freely engaging in business activities, which goes against the principles of free competition and economic growth. Therefore, all these agreements are considered contrary to public policy.Rate this question:
-
- 44.
An agreement forbidden by law is known as _______________
-
Legal agreement
-
Illegal agreement
-
Wagering agreement
-
Invalid agreement
Correct Answer
A. Illegal agreementExplanation
An agreement forbidden by law is referred to as an illegal agreement. This means that the agreement violates the laws and regulations set by the governing authorities. Such agreements are considered void and unenforceable.Rate this question:
-
- 45.
An illegal agreement is __________
-
Void
-
Voidable
-
Valid
-
Conditionally enforceable
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An illegal agreement is considered void because it violates the law and is therefore unenforceable. This means that the agreement has no legal effect and cannot be upheld in a court of law. Void agreements are considered null and void from the beginning, as if they never existed.Rate this question:
-
- 46.
Which of the following statements incorrect?
-
An agreement which is immoral or opposed to pubic policy, is illegal.
-
An agreement which is immoral or opposed to public policy, is illegal
-
An illegal agreement is enforceable with the permission of court
-
An illegal agreement is void and thus not enforceable in a court of law
Correct Answer
A. An illegal agreement is enforceable with the permission of court -
- 47.
An agreement to do an illegal act e.g., to share the earnings of smuggling business is
-
Void
-
Valid
-
Voidable
-
Contingent
Correct Answer
A. VoidExplanation
An agreement to do an illegal act, such as sharing the earnings of a smuggling business, is considered void. This means that the agreement is not legally binding and has no legal effect. The law does not recognize or enforce agreements that involve illegal activities. Therefore, any agreement made with the intention of committing an illegal act is considered void from the beginning.Rate this question:
-
- 48.
The law treats the illegal agreements as if it had not been made at all and thus, no right of action is available to either party .
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The statement is true because illegal agreements are considered void ab initio, meaning they are treated as if they never existed. As a result, the law does not recognize any rights or obligations arising from illegal agreements, and neither party can take legal action to enforce the terms of the agreement.Rate this question:
-
- 49.
A let out this house to B, a known prostitute, for the purpose of her trade. It is an illegal agreement and void. Can A recover rent form B?
-
Yes
-
No
Correct Answer
A. NoExplanation
Since the agreement between A and B is illegal and void, A cannot recover rent from B. Illegal agreements are not enforceable by law, and therefore A cannot legally demand rent from B for the use of the house.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Dec 11, 2023 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Dec 11, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Aug 17, 2011Quiz Created by
Sweetsalman123
Back to top