Defenses to Negligence under Torts Law
Sure! Here’s an overview of the main Defenses to Negligence under Tort Law:
Defenses to Negligence in Tort Law
When a plaintiff sues for negligence, the defendant can raise several defenses to avoid or reduce liability. These defenses challenge the plaintiff’s claim that the defendant was at fault or that the plaintiff suffered damages due to that fault.
1. Contributory Negligence
Definition: The plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to their injury.
Effect: In jurisdictions that follow pure contributory negligence (rare), if the plaintiff is even slightly negligent, they are barred from recovering damages.
Example: If a pedestrian crosses against a traffic signal and gets hit, their recovery may be barred.
2. Comparative Negligence
Definition: The plaintiff’s negligence reduces the defendant’s liability in proportion to the plaintiff’s fault.
Types:
Pure Comparative Negligence: Plaintiff can recover damages minus their percentage of fault.
Modified Comparative Negligence: Plaintiff recovers only if their fault is below a certain threshold (usually 50% or 51%).
Example: If the plaintiff is 30% at fault and defendant 70%, plaintiff recovers 70% of damages.
3. Assumption of Risk
Definition: The plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risks inherent in a dangerous activity.
Effect: Bars or reduces recovery because the plaintiff accepted the danger.
Express Assumption: Through a written or verbal agreement (e.g., waivers in sports).
Implied Assumption: By conduct, plaintiff voluntarily exposed themselves to the risk.
Example: A person who voluntarily participates in a contact sport assumes the risk of injury.
4. Immunity
Certain defendants may be immune from negligence claims, including:
Sovereign Immunity: Governments and their agencies are protected from some lawsuits.
Charitable Immunity: Some jurisdictions limit liability for charitable organizations.
Family Immunity: Historically, some family members were immune from suing each other.
5. Necessity
In some cases, defendants may argue they acted out of necessity to prevent a greater harm.
This defense is more common in intentional torts but can sometimes limit negligence liability.
6. Statute of Limitations
If the plaintiff files the negligence claim after the legally allowed time period, the claim will be barred.
Summary Table
| Defense | Effect | Key Point |
|---|---|---|
| Contributory Negligence | Bars recovery if plaintiff negligent | Harsh; rare today |
| Comparative Negligence | Reduces damages by plaintiff’s fault | Most common today |
| Assumption of Risk | Bars or reduces recovery | Plaintiff voluntarily accepted risk |
| Immunity | Bars or limits liability | Applies to govt., charities, families |
| Necessity | Justifies actions in emergencies | Less common in negligence cases |
| Statute of Limitations | Bars claims after deadline | Procedural defense |
RELATED Blog
0 comments