What is meant by contributory negligence?

Question: What is meant by contributory negligence?

Find the question and answer of Law of Torts only on Legal Bites. [What is meant by contributory negligence?]

Answer

Contributory negligence is a legal defence in tort law that arises when the plaintiff's own negligence contributes to their injuries. In other words, if the plaintiff's own careless behaviour played a role in causing their injuries, they may be barred from recovering damages from the defendant.

To establish contributory negligence, the defendant must show that the plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care for their own safety and that this failure contributed to their injuries. If contributory negligence is established, the plaintiff is barred from recovering any damages, even if the defendant was also negligent.

Contributory negligence has been a controversial legal doctrine, and many jurisdictions have replaced it with the more modern principle of comparative negligence, which allows the recovery of damages in proportion to the respective fault of each party. However, some jurisdictions still follow the contributory negligence rule.

Several landmark case laws have dealt with the concept of contributory negligence, including:

The Li v. Yellow Cab, 532 P.2d 1226 (1975) is a landmark case in California that abolished the doctrine of contributory negligence and replaced it with comparative negligence.

In Li v. Yellow Cab, the plaintiff was injured in a car accident caused by the defendant's taxi driver. The trial court instructed the jury that if the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to his injuries, he could not recover any damages from the defendant. The jury found that the plaintiff was 40% at fault and the defendant was 60% at fault, but the plaintiff was barred from recovering any damages due to the doctrine of contributory negligence.

The California Supreme Court, in a groundbreaking decision, abolished the doctrine of contributory negligence and replaced it with comparative negligence. Under the comparative negligence system, the plaintiff's recovery is reduced in proportion to their own degree of fault. In other words, even if the plaintiff is partially at fault for their injuries, they can still recover damages from the defendant, although the amount of damages will be reduced based on their percentage of fault.

The Li v. Yellow Cab case has had a significant impact on tort law in California and other states that have adopted comparative negligence. It has been cited as a model for other courts considering the adoption of comparative negligence and has led to a more equitable distribution of liability in personal injury cases.

Davies v. Mann, 152 Eng. Rep. 588 (1842): This case involved a collision between the defendant's cart and the plaintiff's donkey. The plaintiff had left the donkey unattended on the road, and the defendant's cart collided with the donkey, killing it. The court held that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent for leaving the donkey on the road, and as a result, was barred from recovering damages.

Butterfield v. Forrester, (1809) 103 E.R. 926: In this case, the plaintiff was riding a horse at night and collided with a pole that the defendant had erected across the road. The plaintiff argued that the defendant was negligent for placing the pole across the road, but the court held that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent for riding too fast in the dark, and as a result, was barred from recovering damages.

Contributory negligence is a legal defence in tort law that bars a plaintiff from recovering damages if their own negligence contributed to their injuries. While some jurisdictions still follow this rule, many have replaced it with the more modern principle of comparative negligence, which allows the recovery of damages in proportion to the respective fault of each party.

• Law of Torts - Notes, Case Laws And Study Material
• Law Aspirants: Ultimate Test Prep Destination