Practice question
An operator gives its first explanation of a previously unappreciated danger only after the participant has been injured. It relies solely on that later explanation to prove informed acceptance before exposure. What is the defect?
- Post-injury warnings automatically prove prior consent
- The later explanation does not establish the required prior knowledge and appreciation
- Actual comprehension is unnecessary
- Consent can always be imposed retrospectively
- Every explanation eliminates a completed injury
Legal references
- Civil Code, Articles 6, 19-21, 27, 32, 430, 1144-1155, 1757-1758 and 2034: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Co., G.R. No. 164749, March 15, 2017, MAIN decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/mar2017/gr_164749_2017.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.