Tort Defences

Question 1

Tort defences essay plan

Answer 1

Contributory negligence:
- The Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 - it’s a partial defence, meaning courts can apportion the loss between the parties (both at fault under s1(1)) and allocate percentage of blameworthiness on C
- Burden of proof on D to prove:
1) C failed to take proper care for their own safety in the circumstances - Revill v Newbury
2) This failure was a contributory cause of the damage suffered. This has included failure to wear seatbelt (Froom v Butcher), not follow safety instructions (Staples v Gypsum Mines), suicide (Reeves v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis)…
- Applies to: OLA, negligence

Volenti non fit injuria/consent:
- Complete defence (absolves D of all legal consequences of their actions) - required C to have freely and voluntarily accepted the risk, with full understanding of the nature and extent of risk - Morris v Murray
- acceptance can be expressed or implied - Smith v Charles Baker and Sons
- Applies to OLA, negligence

For private nuisance - ordinary use of land, statutory authority, act of God and nuisance arising naturally, prescription

For RvF - act of a stranger, act of God, statutory authority, consent/benefit

Question 2

Revill v Newbury

Answer 2

Contributory negligence

C was two-thirds responsible for own injuries

Question 3

Smith v Charles Baker and Sons

Answer 3

Volenti non fit injuria

C may have been aware of danger of job, but didn’t consent to the lack of care - in employment situation, knowing a danger exists doesn’t mean agreeing with it

Question 4

Morris v Murray

Answer 4

Volenti non fit injuria

The risk in accepting a ride in an aircraft with a heavily intoxicated pilot was so glaringly dangerous that C was taken to voluntarily accepted it