- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by
.
- Posts
which expression best describes the situation where the courts declare that a person’s injury is partly attributable to the injured person’s own actions.
A. volenti non fit injuria
B. novus actus interveniensthe answer for the following question is A however according to my knowledge I chose B because for it to be A shouldn’t the injured party have a. given consent and b. known about the likely damages. please explain
I don’t see that novus actus interveniens would be appropriate (some external act or event that contributes / exacerbates the situation)
But I’m also not convinced that volenti is appropriate. Yes, the injured party must have known of the risk and been a volunteer to participate but the cases that I (used to) quote to illustrate volenti don’t seem to illustrate this point about the party’s own actions that resulted in that party’s injuries
Haynes v Harwood compared with Cutler v United Dairies
(Volenti is set aside in a ‘rescue’ situation but is applied where the ‘rescuer’ is held to have been ‘a meddler’)
It seems to me that more appropriate answer would be “contributory negligence”
OK?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.