Question
The Wagan Mound Case
discusses:Solution
In order to calculate the damages remoteness test of directness was replaced with foreseeability in the Wagan Mound case. In this case a large quantity of oil was spilt into Sydney Harbour from the Wagon Mound and it drifted under the wharf where the claimants were oxyacetylene welding. The resulting fire caused extensive damage to the wharf and to vessels moored nearby. The Privy Council replaced the direct consequence test with the requirement that, in order to be recoverable, damage must be foreseeable in all the circumstances, thus, although pollution was a foreseeable consequence of the spillage, an outbreak of fire was not.
Identify the logic of the below given series and given answer.
Series I :: 81, 89, 116, 241, (A), 1915
Series II :: (B), 204, 208, 4...
18Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 434Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 642Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 746Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 798Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ?
...10, 22, 46, ?, 130, 190
12, 20, 36, ?, 132, 260
8Â Â Â Â 20Â Â Â Â 36Â Â Â Â Â 56Â Â Â Â Â 80Â Â Â Â ?
If 152,   242,    x ,  332,   404,    314,
then find the value of (2x – 1)?
...21, 22, 48, 153, 628, ?
30Â Â Â Â Â Â 15Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 15Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 30 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 120Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ?
...48Â Â Â Â 61 Â Â Â Â 76 Â Â Â Â 94Â Â Â Â 116 Â Â Â Â Â ?
If 4 2 x 1.5 0.5
Then, 1/3 x + 2.5 = ?