Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Defences to a claim - Coggle Diagram
Defences to a claim
Contributory negligence - when the D and the C are each partly to blame for the injury suffered by the C. Damages are reduced.
-
-
-
-
Stinton v Stintion - It will not be contributory negligence if they did not know the danger/risk or if it is not known to a reasonable person
-
Consent- a full defence,when the C
accepts a voluntary assumption of the risk of the harm-no injury is done to one who consents to the risk
Stermer v Lawson - the C could not consent,as they would not fully appreciate the risk.
Smith v Baker - If the C cannot exercise free choice,then they cannot consent.
Haynes v Harwood - The defence of consent cannot be used against a policemen whilst carrying out their public duty.
Ogwo v Taylor - The HofL decided that a person with special skills e.g firemen should not be held on disadavantage when compared to the laymen.
Sidaway v Governors of the Bethlem Royal and Maudsley Hospitals - Within medical areas,a patient need not be made aware of all possible but unlikely side effects. Consent was succesful.
ICI v Ltd Shatwell - Acting against orders is evidence to show that the C assumed the risk and the defence will succeed.
-
Exlusion of liability - An occupier may restrict, modify or exclude his duty to any visitor by agreement or otherwise s.2(1)
-
Woolbridge v Sumner - There was no tort committed so,no defences was relevant.