Question 1

Statement : The Environmental pollution Authority has proposed that the auto-rickshaws which clog Delhi streets and pollute its air should be converted to run on clean fuels. Assumptions : I. The "clean fuels" which are accessible in the market are …

Accepted Answer

Assumption I is implicit because otherwise it would not have been prescribed. As the Environment pollution Authority is concerned with auto-rickshaws, assumption II seems quite plausible.

Question 2

Statement : Protection of national interest becomes paramount in the case of MNCs in many situations. Assumptions : I. Parties other than MNCs are always found prudent in protecting national interest. II. MNCs are often found misusing environmental …

Accepted Answer

National interest could or could not be paramount for other industrial concerns. So assumption I is not implicit. There is not even a mention of environmental resources. We can treat assumption II as a possibility but it is not necessarily so.

Question 3

Statement : Paging industries have been going through tough times partly because of the fact that the industry went through a period of unsustainable growth where subscribers were attracted more by the gifts accompanying a pager than by the service …

Accepted Answer

Gift scheme gave a spurt to paging industry but we cannot generalise it. So assumption I is not implicit because of the word always. II is implicit. That is why paging industries are now going through tough times.

Question 4

Statement–Assumption — “A brand is essentially a seller's promise to consistently deliver a specific set of features, benefits, and service to buyers.” Assumptions: I. A branded good always gives satisfaction to the buyers. II. An unbranded good pos…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement defines a brand as a promise of consistent delivery of certain features, benefits, and service. In assumption questions, we identify the minimum beliefs that must be true for the statement to make sense—not what might often be true in practice.Given Data / Assumptions:Brand = promise of consistency in features/benefits/service.No claim is made about guaranteed satisfaction.No claim is made about what unbranded goods offer.Concept / Approach:Implicit assumptions must be necessary. Adding universal claims (like “always satisfies”) typically overcommits beyond the definition. Similarly, dragging in comparisons with unbranded goods is not required by the definition offered.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: “Always gives satisfaction” is stronger than “promise of consistent delivery.” Products can deliver promised features yet fail to satisfy some buyers. Hence I is not necessary.2) Assumption II: The definition of brand does not require any statement about unbranded goods having the same features. So II is not necessary.3) Therefore neither I nor II is implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Marketing texts treat brands as signals of expected performance; satisfaction is contingent on buyer needs and experience, not guaranteed by the definition.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Either/Both add claims not demanded by the definition, thus not implicit.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “promise of features” with “guaranteed satisfaction,” and importing comparisons with unbranded offerings.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 5

Statement–Assumption — “From the worldwide advertising hype one would imagine that the new year 2000 will be a magic wand changing, with a swish, India and the world.” Assumptions: I. People’s imagination is strongly shaped by advertising. II. There…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence comments that heavy advertising makes people “imagine” 2000 as magically transformative. Our task is to pick the assumption(s) the statement relies on.Given Data / Assumptions:There is worldwide advertising hype.That hype induces a particular imagination among audiences.No definitive claim is made about what will actually happen at the millennium.Concept / Approach:The statement rests on a causal link: hype → imagination. It does not require a claim about the objective reality of the millennium events.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: If advertising did not shape imagination, the observation “one would imagine …” because of hype collapses. So I is implicit.2) Assumption II: The speaker’s skepticism about miraculous change is not necessary for the observation about imagination. The statement comments on perceived expectations, not on actual outcomes. Thus II is not implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Opinion pieces often separate “what ads make you feel” from “what will happen.” Only the influence of ads is presupposed.Why Other Options Are Wrong:II-only/Either/Neither/Both misread the sentence as a prediction about reality rather than a remark about advertising’s effect on perception.Common Pitfalls:Conflating commentary on hype-driven imagination with definitive claims about events.Final Answer:if only assumption I is implicit.

Question 6

Statement–Assumption — “On the net, an entrepreneur located in the metaphorical Jhumritalaiya can become a global player.” Assumptions: I. The net is the best way to advertise an entrepreneur nowadays. II. Only entrepreneurs related to computer soft…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The claim is that the internet allows an entrepreneur—even from a remote place (“Jhumritalaiya”)—to operate globally. We test which assumptions must be true for this claim.Given Data / Assumptions:The net provides reach, distribution, communication, and transaction capabilities.No comparison to “best” advertising channels is required.No restriction to software businesses is stated.Concept / Approach:The minimal premise is that the internet can bridge geography for entrepreneurs across sectors (products, services, content, etc.). Superlatives (“best way”) or sectoral exclusivity (“only software”) are not necessary.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: The claim works even if the net is merely a viable channel, not necessarily the “best” advertising medium. Hence I is not implicit.2) Assumption II: The statement allows any entrepreneur to scale via the net; it does not restrict to software. Thus II is not implicit.3) Therefore, neither assumption is implicit.Verification / Alternative check:E-commerce, D2C brands, education, and creative services show internet-enabled global reach beyond software.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Picking I or II adds unnecessary constraints not required by the statement.Common Pitfalls:Reading “global player” as “software exporter only,” and confusing “viable” with “best.”Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 7

Statement–Assumption — “If there were posters available of these top IT professionals, they would have replaced Shahrukh and Sachin on many hostel walls by now.” Assumptions: I. Posters of IT professionals are not currently available in the market. …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence uses a counterfactual: if posters of certain IT stars existed, they would have replaced celebrity posters on hostel walls. We need to identify the hidden beliefs that make this claim reasonable.Given Data / Assumptions:“If there were posters available …” suggests such posters are presently unavailable.The claim predicts replacement—i.e., IT icons’ appeal would surpass existing film/sports icons among students.Concept / Approach:For a counterfactual of this kind, two things must be true: (a) the missing condition (availability) is what prevents the outcome at present, and (b) the outcome (replacement) would indeed occur given availability, which rests on presumed popularity or aspirational pull.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: The “if there were” framing ordinarily implies non-availability now; otherwise, availability would not be the barrier. Hence I is implicit.2) Assumption II: Predicting “replacement” requires believing student demand for these posters is strong enough to displace major celebrities. Therefore II is also implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Without (I), the counterfactual loses force; without (II), replacement would be an overreach. Both are needed.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only-I/Only-II/Either/Neither each omits part of the logic behind the forecasted displacement.Common Pitfalls:Treating “if available” as a mere wish rather than the stated binding constraint, or ignoring the popularity premise required for replacement.Final Answer:if both I and II is implicit.

Question 8

Statement–Assumption — “The Net can be for India what oil was for West Asia.” Assumptions: I. Most IT entrepreneurs in the world are Indians. II. India can have a monopoly in the global IT sector.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The analogy suggests the internet could be a transformative economic driver for India, akin to oil for West Asia. We must locate minimal assumptions required for this analogy to hold.Given Data / Assumptions:The Net has large value-creation potential.India can harness significant benefits from the Net.No claim about global entrepreneur demographics or monopoly is necessary.Concept / Approach:Analogies of transformational potential require only that the sector can materially reshape an economy; they do not necessitate majority control or monopoly.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: “Most IT entrepreneurs are Indians” is irrelevant to the analogy; not implicit.2) Assumption II: The claim does not require monopoly—many transformative sectors exist without monopolies. Not implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Countries can benefit greatly from sectors they do not monopolize (e.g., electronics, services, tourism).Why Other Options Are Wrong:Options implying I or II mistake “scale and impact” for “dominance or exclusivity.”Common Pitfalls:Reading “like oil” as “monopoly like OPEC dominance,” which the sentence does not entail.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 9

Statement–Assumption — “Have fun this New Year’s Eve, but not at others’ cost.” — Delhi Police Assumptions: I. Generally, people celebrate New Year’s parties at others’ expense. II. People will celebrate New Year’s Eve enthusiastically, posing a ris…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:This is a cautionary public message: enjoy, but avoid harming or inconveniencing others. We must check which assumptions are indispensable for issuing such an advisory.Given Data / Assumptions:Public celebrations occur on New Year’s Eve.Some behaviors can externalize costs (noise, vandalism, drunk driving, harassment), hence the caution.The message is preventive, not accusatory.Concept / Approach:For advisories, it is sufficient that risky behavior might occur; it is not necessary that “generally” people party at others’ expense (that is too strong). Nor must we assume any particular intensity (“with a bang”)—the advisory stands regardless.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: “Generally at others’ expense” overgeneralizes and is unnecessary; advisories target potential, not universal, misconduct. Not implicit.2) Assumption II: The precise phrasing “will enjoy … with a bang” is not required; the advisory works even without asserting exuberant celebrations. Not implicit.3) Therefore, neither assumption is implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Public notices often state “do X, but responsibly” without presuming widespread wrongdoing or guaranteeing particular celebration styles.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Both/Either import stronger claims than necessary for a standard caution.Common Pitfalls:Confusing a preventive guideline with a claim about what “generally” happens; reading exaggerated language into a neutral advisory.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 10

Statement–Assumption — “Reckless partying can lead to health problems and you may reach a hospital straight from the discotheque.” Assumptions: I. Heavy drinking is the main reason for such health problems. II. Sometimes dancing itself may lead to h…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement warns that “reckless partying” can culminate in health problems serious enough to require hospitalization. In statement–assumption questions, we must identify only those underlying beliefs that are necessary for the statement to be sensible, not every possibility suggested by real life.Given Data / Assumptions:“Reckless partying” is a broad phrase that can include sleep deprivation, dehydration, substance misuse, heat, overcrowding, or accidents.The statement does not specify a unique cause (e.g., alcohol) or a specific activity (e.g., dancing) as the main culprit.Concept / Approach:An implicit assumption must be indispensable. If the statement can still hold true without it, then it is not implicit. Here, the caution is general: any reckless behavior associated with intense parties may endanger health.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Test Assumption I (heavy drinking is the main reason): Replace heavy drinking with other reckless factors (extreme fatigue, dehydration). The warning still stands. Hence I is not necessary.2) Test Assumption II (dancing may lead to health problems): Even if no one danced (say, it was a loud overnight gathering), “reckless partying” could still cause trouble. Thus II is not necessary.3) Since the caution remains valid without I or II, neither is implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Public-health advisories often avoid pinpointing a single cause when multiple risk pathways exist; they merely flag danger from overall recklessness.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Either/Both attribute singular or specific mechanisms that the statement never requires.Common Pitfalls:Equating “party risk” exclusively with alcohol or dancing; ignoring other hazards like fatigue, crowding, or heat stress.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 11

Statement–Assumption — “Live a full life. Don’t drink and drive.” — Delhi Traffic Police Assumptions: I. Driving after drinking may cause accidents. II. Some people do drive after drinking.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:“Don’t drink and drive” is a safety advisory linking alcohol consumption to driving risk. We must identify the minimum belief that must hold for this warning to make sense.Given Data / Assumptions:The advisory urges avoiding a specific behavior because of danger.It does not quantify how many people commit the behavior; it merely addresses a hazardous possibility.Concept / Approach:An advisory presupposes a causal risk: drinking impairs driving and can lead to crashes, injury, or death. It does not require assuming that “some people generally” do it; prevalence is not essential to the logic of the caution.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: If drinking did not elevate accident risk, the warning would be pointless. Hence I is necessary and implicit.2) Assumption II: The statement remains meaningful even if very few people drink and drive; advisories routinely target low-frequency but high-severity risks. Therefore II is not necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Public notices like “Wear seatbelts” or “Don’t text and drive” do not rely on how many people currently violate the rule; they rest on the hazard itself.Why Other Options Are Wrong:II-only/Either/Both/Neither either omit the essential hazard premise or add an unnecessary frequency claim.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “advisory relevance” with “assumption of widespread misconduct.”Final Answer:if only assumption I is implicit.

Question 12

Statement–Assumption — “Mother tongue is undoubtedly the most facile (easiest) language for children to learn in early schooling.” Assumptions: I. Learning in other languages imposes extra strain on the minds of early-school children. II. After matu…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement asserts that the mother tongue is the easiest language for early schooling. Such a comparative claim (“most facile”) usually presumes that alternatives are harder at that stage, thereby imposing added effort or cognitive load.Given Data / Assumptions:Children begin schooling with a language already used at home (mother tongue).“Most facile” implies a comparison against non-native/second languages during early years.Concept / Approach:To justify “most facile,” the minimal assumption is that learning via other languages is comparatively more demanding for young children. However, nothing in the statement requires a claim about later stages of life.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: If other languages did not create extra demand or strain relative to the mother tongue, the superlative “most facile” would lack support. Thus I is implicit.2) Assumption II: The statement is silent about later schooling; children may or may not learn other languages later. The present claim concerns the early phase only, so II is not necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Education policy debates often cite early literacy advantages in a familiar language; such arguments do not hinge on what happens in higher grades.Why Other Options Are Wrong:II-only/Either/Both/Neither either exclude the essential comparative premise or add an unnecessary future-learning claim.Common Pitfalls:Reading an early-years claim as a life-long prescription; assuming the statement must also address later multilingual education.Final Answer:if only assumption I is implicit.

Question 13

Statement–Assumption — “Success and failure are parts of every individual’s life and career.” Assumptions: I. The speaker truly knows the lives of average people. II. This statement will encourage those who have failed.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence is a general maxim claiming universality of ups and downs. Our task is to check whether it presupposes expertise about people’s lives or a guaranteed motivational impact.Given Data / Assumptions:The statement is normative/descriptive wisdom, not an evidence report.It does not promise therapeutic effect; it is a perspective.Concept / Approach:Generalizations can be offered without personal knowledge of “average” lives (they may be philosophical or proverbial). Likewise, whether it motivates listeners is an outcome, not a necessary premise.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: The content can stand as a widely accepted truism without the speaker proving knowledge of everyone’s life; thus I is not required.2) Assumption II: Even if nobody feels encouraged, the statement’s truth-claim remains; II is unnecessary.Verification / Alternative check:Maxims like “change is constant” do not rely on who utters them or on their psychological effect.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Either/Both impose extra commitments (expertise or motivation) beyond the statement’s scope.Common Pitfalls:Assuming every general statement must imply authority or intent to console.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 14

Statement–Assumption — “To reduce the adverse effects of nature on society, one must be aware, remain alert, and find solutions to fight back.” Assumptions: I. Awareness and alertness help reduce those adverse effects. II. Practical solutions to cou…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The directive prescribes three levers—awareness, alertness, and solution-finding—to reduce nature’s adverse impacts (e.g., floods, heatwaves, storms). We must test which assumptions are indispensable to justify this prescription.Given Data / Assumptions:Preventive behavior (awareness/alertness) can lower vulnerability or exposure.Mitigation/adaptation solutions exist or are discoverable.Concept / Approach:Prescriptive advice requires believing that the recommended actions can actually help. If either “alertness helps” or “solutions exist” were false, the prescription would be meaningless or futile.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: Without the premise that awareness reduces risk (e.g., early warnings, preparedness), telling people to “be aware and alert” would be pointless. Thus I is implicit.2) Assumption II: If no solutions existed or could be devised (e.g., evacuation plans, heat shelters, resilient infrastructure), advising people to “find solutions” would be irrational. Thus II is also implicit.3) Hence both I and II are necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Disaster-risk-reduction frameworks rely on situational awareness plus feasible mitigation/adaptation options to reduce loss.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Either/Neither each omits one of the two enabling premises that give the advice its force.Common Pitfalls:Treating the statement as mere rhetoric rather than action-guiding advice that presupposes efficacy and feasibility.Final Answer:if both I and II is implicit.

Question 15

Statement–Assumption — “The finance ministry reported a huge revenue deficit because customs and excise performed badly due to severe industrial slowdown.” Assumptions: I. Customs and excise form a significant part of government revenue. II. Collect…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement attributes a “huge revenue deficit” to weak customs and excise receipts arising from an industrial slowdown. To make this causal chain plausible, two background conditions must hold.Given Data / Assumptions:Customs and excise are material revenue heads for the exchequer.Industrial activity drives import/export volumes and manufacturing output, affecting these tax bases.Concept / Approach:Attribution requires both materiality and linkage. If either were false (insignificant head; no linkage), the deficit explanation would fail.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: If customs/excise were minor, their underperformance could not cause a “huge” deficit. So I is necessary.2) Assumption II: If industrial slowdown did not affect these heads (e.g., collections fixed irrespective of output/flows), then the causal step would collapse. So II is necessary.Verification / Alternative check:In most tax structures, excise and trade taxes co-move with production and trade volumes; downturns depress collections.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/II-only/Either/Neither each removes a link needed to sustain the ministry’s explanation.Common Pitfalls:Overlooking that causal attributions usually depend on both a significant base and a sensitivity channel.Final Answer:if both I and II is implicit.

Question 16

Statement–Assumption — “If you are a middleman, the Internet’s cheaper prices and faster services can dis-intermediate you.” Assumptions: I. Middlemen are usually a hindrance to an efficient economy. II. Middlemen’s role is to intermediate transacti…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The claim is that the Internet can remove (“dis-intermediate”) the middleman by enabling direct, cheaper, and faster interactions. We must separate the functional premise from any value judgment.Given Data / Assumptions:Middlemen exist to bridge producers and consumers (logistics, search, aggregation, trust).Digital channels can replicate/reconfigure those functions.Concept / Approach:An implicit assumption must be necessary for the claim to make sense. The statement needs the role definition of a middleman, not an evaluation that middlemen are “hindrances.”Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I: Whether middlemen are “hindrances” is irrelevant; even helpful intermediaries can be bypassed if technology substitutes their functions. I is not necessary.2) Assumption II: If middlemen did not intermediate transactions, there would be nothing for the Internet to bypass. Thus II is necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Platforms often reduce search and transaction costs, enabling direct producer–consumer matches without normative judgment about middlemen.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/Either/Neither/Both either inject a needless value claim or omit the essential role premise.Common Pitfalls:Confusing a technological possibility (bypass) with an opinion that intermediaries are “bad.”Final Answer:if only assumption II is implicit.

Question 17

Statement–Assumption — “The Net has many useless sites; www.bigwaste.com is one of them—the difference is, it openly admits being a big waste of time.” Assumptions: I. Most websites claim to be useful even when they are not. II. The Net has no mecha…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence contrasts “many useless sites” with one site that uniquely admits its uselessness. We must see whether it relies on strong claims about the majority of sites or about the absence of filtering mechanisms.Given Data / Assumptions:There are “many” useless sites (not necessarily “most”).Bigwaste’s distinct feature is self-admission.No claim is made about discovery mechanisms or platform governance.Concept / Approach:To be implicit, a claim must be essential. The observation works if merely “many” sites are useless and some of them do not admit it. It does not require “most” to be deceptive, nor that the Net lacks ways to separate good from bad.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Assumption I (“most sites claim to be useful even when they are not”) is an overreach. The contrast requires only that Bigwaste’s candid labeling is unusual, not that a majority are deceitful. Hence I is not necessary.2) Assumption II (no mechanism exists) is also unnecessary; the statement comments on sites’ self-representation, not on search/ranking systems.Verification / Alternative check:The point stands even if curation tools or reviews exist—the novelty is Bigwaste’s self-description.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I-only/Either/Both imply stronger environment-wide claims; II-only implies an infrastructure judgment absent from the sentence.Common Pitfalls:Reading “many” as “most,” and importing debates about moderation/filtering not referenced by the statement.Final Answer:if neither I nor II is implicit.

Question 18

Statement–Assumption — DMRC chairman: “We are in talks with the Japanese Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) for the second tranche of Rs 1,600 crore.” Assumptions: I) DMRC has already received the first tranche of the JBIC loan. II) Talks for…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement mentions negotiations for a “second tranche” of funding from JBIC. In statement–assumption questions, we test what must be taken for granted for the statement to be meaningful, not what may merely be true in the world.Given Data / Assumptions:Second tranche ordinarily follows a first tranche in the same facility.“In talks” indicates an ongoing discussion specific to tranche two.Receiving money and finalising talks are distinct events.Concept / Approach:To talk about a “second tranche,” the existence or conclusion of arrangements for a first tranche must already be in place; otherwise numbering tranches is meaningless. However, actual disbursal of the first tranche is not strictly required for negotiations on a subsequent tranche to begin.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Identify what “second tranche” presupposes: a prior tranche facility agreed.2) Assumption I (already received) is stronger than necessary; talks for tranche two can occur before tranche one is disbursed.3) Assumption II (first tranche talks finalised) is necessary to make “second tranche” a coherent label.Verification / Alternative check:Large project loans are commonly structured in multiple tranches where later tranches are negotiated once the initial facility is in place, even if not fully drawn.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only I” over-assumes disbursal; “Both” adds an unnecessary condition; “Neither” ignores the tranche structure logic.Common Pitfalls:Confusing loan negotiation milestones with cash receipt.Final Answer:Only assumption II is implicit.

Question 19

Statement–Assumption — “In every community where we sell our brands, we must remember we do not do business in markets; we do business in societies.” — A marketer Assumptions: I) Shops and markets are of no use in selling a brand. II) Understanding …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The aphorism contrasts “markets” (as a narrow transactional view) with “societies” (broader cultural context). We must infer what belief underlies this guidance for marketers.Given Data / Assumptions:Brands operate within norms, identities, and social meanings.Distribution venues (shops/markets) remain channels, not the whole reality.Concept / Approach:An implicit assumption is one that must hold for the statement to make sense. The statement does not deny the utility of physical markets; rather, it elevates the importance of social understanding.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Parse the contrast: transactional vs. societal lens.2) I claims shops are of “no use,” which is extreme and not needed.3) II is necessary: the point urges marketers to understand society to be effective.Verification / Alternative check:Brands succeed when messages, symbolism, and community fit align—evidence that social insight is vital.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only I” misreads the statement; “Both” wrongly adds an absolute; “Neither” ignores the clear thrust.Common Pitfalls:Taking rhetorical contrasts literally (i.e., markets being useless).Final Answer:Only assumption II is implicit.

Question 20

Statement–Assumption — “Consumers are often deceived by terms like ‘goods once sold will not be taken back’ or ‘goods transported at owner’s risk’.” Assumptions: I) Because of such phrases, consumers hesitate to seek compensation. II) Such phrases d…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement alleges deception arising from common disclaimer phrases. For deception to exist, two things must be true: buyers are influenced by the phrases, and the phrases do not legally nullify legitimate claims.Given Data / Assumptions:Consumers read and react to posted terms.Consumer-protection law preserves rights despite unfair contract terms or one-sided notices.Concept / Approach:If the phrases truly barred all claims, there would be no “deception”—just hard legal fact. Calling it deception implies that consumers wrongly believe they lack remedies and that such phrases cannot erase statutory/contractual duties in all circumstances.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Link “deceived” to behavioural effect: reluctance to claim (Assumption I).2) Link “deceived” to legal reality: notices are not total shields (Assumption II).3) Therefore, both assumptions are necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Typical laws restrict unfair terms; transporters still owe reasonable care; sellers owe fitness/merchantability.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Choosing only I or II leaves the statement either behaviourally or legally ungrounded; “Neither” contradicts the notion of deception.Common Pitfalls:Assuming any printed notice overrides statutory rights.Final Answer:Both I and II are implicit.

Statement and Assumption Questions

Questions

Practice smarter