We can derive it ourselves with a fortiori argument: if a paid custodian, who is exempted from liability when the animal suffers a broken limb or dies, is nonetheless liable in cases of theft and loss, is it not logical that a borrower, who is indeed liable in cases of the animal suffering a broken limb or dying, is also liable in cases of theft and loss? Surely this is so.
Art: Coastal Landscape with Figures and Animal by Thomas Sidney Cooper
No comments:
Post a Comment