Tort Law Defences

In tort law, defences allow someone who is accused of causing harm to avoid or reduce liability. Understanding these defences is vital for exams, as they can affect the outcome of cases. This revision section covers the main defences in tort law, focusing on contributory negligence, volenti non fit injuria, and those specific to private nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher.

Contributory Negligence

Definition: Contributory negligence occurs when the claimant (the person bringing the claim) has, through their own carelessness, contributed to the harm they suffered.

Explanation: If the claimant’s own actions partly caused their injury, the court may reduce the amount of compensation they receive. It does not completely prevent a claim, but it limits how much the defendant must pay.

Operation: The court decides what percentage of the harm the claimant is responsible for. For example, if the claimant is found to be 30% responsible, their damages will be reduced by 30%.

Key Cases: Sayers v Harlow UDC;  A woman was injured after trying to escape a locked public toilet. Her damages were reduced because she contributed to her own injury.

Volenti Non Fit Injuria

Definition: This Latin term means “to one who is willing, no harm is done.” It’s used when the claimant knowingly and willingly accepts the risk of harm.

Explanation: If the claimant voluntarily undertook a known risk, the defendant may not be liable. The claimant must have full knowledge of the risk and freely agreed to accept it.

Operation: This defence is a complete bar to recovery. If successful, the claimant receives no compensation.

Key Cases: Smith v Baker; A worker was injured by falling rocks but had not truly consented to the risk, so the defence did not apply. Morris v Murray – A passenger flew with a drunk pilot and was injured; the defence succeeded because the risk was obvious and accepted.

Defences in Private Nuisance

Available Defences:

• Statutory Authority: If the defendant’s actions are authorised by law or statute, this can be a complete defence. For example, local councils carrying out works under statutory powers.
• Prescription: If the nuisance has continued for 20 years without interruption and the claimant has not objected, the defendant may claim a legal right to continue.

Unavailable Defences:

• Coming to the Nuisance: It is not a defence to argue that the claimant moved to the area knowing about the nuisance.
• Public Benefit: Claiming that the defendant’s actions benefit the public does not excuse a private nuisance.
• Examples: If a factory is operating under statutory authority and causes noise, it may have a defence. If a neighbour complains about a long-standing noise that has occurred for over 20 years, prescription may apply.

Defences in Rylands v Fletcher

Available Defences:

• Act of God: Natural events that are unforeseeable and cannot be guarded against (e.g., unusually heavy rainfall causing flooding).
• Consent: If the claimant consented to the accumulation of the dangerous thing, the defendant may avoid liability.
• Default of the Claimant: If the claimant’s actions caused or contributed to the escape, they may not recover damages.
• Statutory Authority: If the defendant’s actions are authorised by statute, this may provide a defence.

Explanation: Rylands v Fletcher deals with liability for damage caused by the escape of something dangerous from the defendant’s land. The above defences can limit or remove liability, depending on the facts.

Examples: If water escapes due to an unexpected earthquake, the defendant may rely on the act of God defence. If the claimant agreed to the storage of chemicals, consent applies.

Summary: Key Points Recap

• Contributory negligence reduces compensation if the claimant partly caused their own harm.
• Volenti non fit injuria is a complete defence – no compensation if the claimant willingly accepted the risk.
• Private nuisance defences include statutory authority and prescription. “Coming to the nuisance” is not a defence.
• Rylands v Fletcher defences include act of God, consent, claimant’s fault, and statutory authority.
• Always consider which defence applies to the specific tort and facts of the case.