...at their own risk. Neither the owner nor the driver will be liable for loss of life or personal injury or other loss or damage howsoever caused. Passengers are not covered by insurance." The plaintiff was injured when the defendant negligently crashed into a wall, and he brought an action for damages. The case came before John Stephenson J., who held that the plaintiff was bound by the notice. Although in his view the plaintiff's infancy would have saved him from being bound by the notice had it been part of a contract of carriage between the parties,2 he could find no contract in this case; and instead he concluded that the notice had made the plaintiff volens as to the defendant's negligence, because infancy was no bar to volenti non fit injuria and the plaintiff had here appreciated and accepted the risk.3 Accordingly he found for the defendant. This decision is open to question on a number of grounds: (1) It seems strange that an infant cannot be volens if he contracts not to sue in respect of injury, but will be so if he merely agrees, without contracting, not to sue. The judge's view would mean that the more a person wants to be bound, the less he will be so. It is certainly true that an infant has no capacity to make a contract not to sue in respect of injury 4: if, as the judge seems to have assumed,5 it follows from this that a contract cannot make an infant volens, then a fortiori an agreement falling short of a...
Words: 1215 - Pages: 5
...VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA When the plaintiff brings an action against the defendant for a particular tort, providing the existence of all the essentials of that tort, the defendant would be liable for the same. The defendant may, however even in such a case avoid his liability by taking the plea of some defence; Volenti Non Fit Injuria is one amongst them. WHAT IS VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA Volenti non fit Injuria or the defence of consent, when a person consents to the infliction of some harm upon himself, he has no remedy for that in tort. In case the plaintiff voluntarily agrees to suffer some harm, he is not allowed to complain for that and his consent serve as a good defence against him. No man can enforce a right which he has voluntarily waived or abandoned. Consent to suffer harm may be expressed or implied. Volenti non fit Injuria is a defence of limited application in tort law. A direct translation of Latin phrase “Volenti non fit Injuria” is to one volunteer, no harm is done. Where the defence of Volenti non fit Injuria applies it operates as a complete defence absolving the Defendant of all liability. The defence of Volenti non fit Injuria requires a freely entered and voluntary agreement by the Claimant, in full knowledge of the circumstances, to absolve the Defendant of all legal consequences of their actions. Let’s understand this with the help of a case law , in this case plaintiff was a spectator at motor car race being held at Brookland on a track owned...
Words: 1597 - Pages: 7
...[Aspects of Contracts and Negligence for Business] Unit 5: Aspects of Contracts and Negligence for Business Unit Code: Y/601/0563 Assignment Title: Be able to apply principles of liability in negligence in business situations Assignment 4 – Scenario As a business law student provide a detailed article on the following to present to your lecturer, showing a clear understanding of the topics: Task 1 4.1 Apply the elements of the tort of negligence and defences in different business situations [Format: Negligence: application of the legal principles of negligence and relevant statutory and case law to business scenarios; General defences: volenti non fit injuria; statutory authority; necessity; Act of God; special defences against specific torts; contributory negligence; Remedies: compensatory and non-compensatory] 4.2 Apply the elements of vicarious liability in given business [Format: Negligence: application of the legal principles of negligence and relevant statutory and case law to business scenarios including: personal injuries, damage to property, economic loss, occupier liability; defences; contributory negligence; remedies] (This provides evidence for outcome LO4 – assessment criteria 4.1, 4.2) _ Assignment Unit 5 – Assignment 4 – HN Specification in Business Assignment 4: HN Business Unit 5: – Aspects of Contracts and Negligence for Business Outcome(s)/criteria: Indicative Characteristics Possible evidence Pass: Be...
Words: 505 - Pages: 3
...CPA in the event that a defect in a product causes damage(s); injury or loss. This is shown in Part 1 of the CPA where the system of strict liability is introduced for defective products to which cause harm. The key liability requirements under CPA and the European directive is that (i) claimant has suffered damages, (ii) product in question is defective and (iii) harm must be caused by a defect in the product providing that these requirements are met proof of negligence is not applicable on part of the claimant and the producer or manufacturer of the product is in every respect liable for any form of harm caused. Defences that can be used against claims under CPA include; ‘development risk’, ‘contributory negligence’, ‘Volenti non fit injuria’ and ‘Ex turpi causa’. The impracticalities of CPA are that a defected product must have caused harm as a requirement for a claim. If a product is defective in terms of not fulfilling its expected use however did not cause any damages there is no grounds to which a claim can be made. ........................................................................................................................................................................... Liability for defective products; the...
Words: 428 - Pages: 2
...Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Shatwell House of Lords LORD REID, VISCOUNT RADCLIFFE, LORD HODSON, LORD PEARCE AND LORD DONOVAN LORD REID. My Lords, this case arises out of the accidental explosion of a charge at a quarry belonging to the appellants which caused injuries to the respondent George Shatwell and his brother James, who were both qualified shotfirers. On 8 June 1960, these two men and another shotfirer, Beswick, had bored and filled fifty shot holes and had inserted electric detonators and connected them up in series. Before firing it was necessary to test the circuit for continuity. This should have been done by connecting long wires so that the men could go to a shelter some eighty yards away and test from there. They had not sufficient wire with them and Beswick went off to get more. The testing ought not to have been done until signals had been given, so that other men could take shelter, and these signals were not due to be given for at least another hour. Soon after Beswick had left George said to his brother “Must we test them”, meaning shall we test them, and James said “yes”. The testing is done by passing a weak current through the circuit in which a small galvanometer is included and if the needle of the instrument moves when a connexion is made the circuit is in order. So George got a galvanometer and James handed two short wires to him. Then George applied the wires to the galvanometer and the needle did not move. This showed that the circuit...
Words: 11329 - Pages: 46
