Explain with illustrations the maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria".
Find the question and answer of Law of Torts only on Legal Bites.
Question: Explain with illustrations the maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria". [BJS 2000, DJS 2005]Find the question and answer of Law of Torts only on Legal Bites. [Explain with illustrations the maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria".]AnswerThe maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria" is a Latin phrase that means "to one who is willing, no harm is done". It is a legal principle that suggests that if a person willingly exposes themselves to a risk of harm or injury, they cannot later complain if that harm...
Question: Explain with illustrations the maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria". [BJS 2000, DJS 2005]
Find the question and answer of Law of Torts only on Legal Bites. [Explain with illustrations the maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria".]
Answer
The maxim "Volenti non-fit injuria" is a Latin phrase that means "to one who is willing, no harm is done". It is a legal principle that suggests that if a person willingly exposes themselves to a risk of harm or injury, they cannot later complain if that harm or injury actually occurs.
The application of this maxim can be seen in many legal contexts, such as in sports, employment, and contracts. Here are some examples and decided cases that illustrate the maxim:
Sports: In sports, players often accept the inherent risks of their chosen activity. For example, a rugby player who willingly participates in a game cannot later sue another player for injuring them during the match. This is because the injured player consented to the risk of injury when they chose to play.
One famous case that illustrates this principle is the case of Watson v. British Boxing Board of Control, [2001] QB 1134. In this case, a professional boxer, Michael Watson, suffered serious injuries during a fight. He claimed that the British Boxing Board of Control was negligent in its medical arrangements for the fight. However, the court held that Watson had willingly accepted the risks of boxing, and therefore the maxim "volenti non-fit injuria" applied.
Employment: In some situations, employees may voluntarily assume risks as part of their job duties. For example, a construction worker who chooses to work at heights cannot later sue their employer if they suffer a fall.
In the case of Smith v. Baker & Sons, [1891] AC 325, a steeplejack (a person who climbs steeples and other high structures) fell to his death while working on a church. The court held that the steeplejack had voluntarily assumed the risk of the dangerous work, and therefore his employer was not liable for his death.
Contracts: The principle of "volenti non-fit injuria" can also apply in contractual relationships. For example, if a person enters into a contract with full knowledge of the risks involved, they cannot later complain if those risks materialize.
In the case of Morris v. Murray, [1991] 2 QB 6, a person signed up for a skydiving course but was injured during a jump. He sued the organizers of the course, claiming that they had been negligent. However, the court held that the participant had willingly assumed the risks of skydiving, and therefore the organizers were not liable for his injuries.
Overall, the maxim "volenti non-fit injuria" is an important legal principle that highlights the significance of consent and the assumption of risk. If a person willingly exposes themselves to a risk of harm, they cannot later complain if that harm actually occurs.
Mayank Shekhar
Mayank is an alumnus of the prestigious Faculty of Law, Delhi University. Under his leadership, Legal Bites has been researching and developing resources through blogging, educational resources, competitions, and seminars.
