MLL213 Study Guide - Final Guide: Contributory Negligence, Vicroads, Black Ice
24 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
10 Defences to Negligent Action
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION
1. Was P negligent? I.e. did P fail to take reasonable care for own safety and,
a. Ps egligee is a failue to easoale take fo o safet failig to take
reasonable steps to avoid a foreseeable risk of injury to self
i. No euieet that Ps atios hae edageed othe pesos
ii. Note that P can foresee that others will act negligently. March.
2. If so, as Ps egligee a ause of the daage ad,
a. D ust poe Ps egligence contributed to the injuries – not necessarily the
accident.
i. Eg. Failure to wear a seatbelt or crash helmet amounts to
contributory negligence where P would not have suffered injury (or
would have suffered less injury) if a seatbelt has been worn.
ii. Ps egligee ust hae ee a eal ause of the ijuies.
3. If es, hat edutio i Ps daages ould e just ad euitable having regard to
Ps shae i the esposiilit fo that daage.
Montfroy v Roads Corporation (2005) VSC 320
- Ps a slipped o lak ie ad a hup i the oad. Sued D fo egligee. Got 620,000
-
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
STANDARD OF CARE: MENTAL DISABILITY
Mental disability must be disregarded: court must apply the standard of a person without
the plaitiffs etal disailit.
STANDARD OF CARE: CHILDREN
At common law, children not held to adult standard. Joslyn.
Joslyn v Berryman:
- Whether a plaintiff ought to have been aware that the defendant was intoxicated for the
purposes of s48 and s 49 must be determined with respect to all those facts and circumstances
known by the plaintiff, or that the plaintiff ought to have known.
-
Imbree v McNeilly:
- The standard of care required from a learner driver is that of competent and experienced driver
-
Town of Port Hedland v Hodder (No. 2) (2012) WASCA 212
- Could ot take ito aout Ps edued apait fo foesight ad pudee
- 100% of damages because diving blocks were basically an invite.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
March: if so, (cid:449)as p(cid:859)s (cid:374)eglige(cid:374)(cid:272)e a (cid:272)ause of the da(cid:373)age a(cid:374)d, d (cid:373)ust p(cid:396)o(cid:448)e p(cid:859)s (cid:374)egligence contributed to the injuries not necessarily the accident, eg. P(cid:859)s sha(cid:396)e i(cid:374) the (cid:396)espo(cid:374)si(cid:271)ilit(cid:455) fo(cid:396) that da(cid:373)age. P(cid:859)s (cid:272)a(cid:396) slipped o(cid:374) (cid:271)la(cid:272)k i(cid:272)e a(cid:374)d a hu(cid:373)p i(cid:374) the (cid:396)oad. The standard of care required from a learner driver is that of competent and experienced driver. Mental disability must be disregarded: court must apply the standard of a person without the plai(cid:374)tiff(cid:859)s (cid:373)e(cid:374)tal disa(cid:271)ilit(cid:455). Could (cid:374)ot take i(cid:374)to a(cid:272)(cid:272)ou(cid:374)t p(cid:859)s (cid:396)edu(cid:272)ed (cid:272)apa(cid:272)it(cid:455) fo(cid:396) fo(cid:396)esight a(cid:374)d p(cid:396)ude(cid:374)(cid:272)e. 100% of damages because diving blocks were basically an invite. At common law, children not held to adult standard. An objective test: children expected to exercise the degree of foresight and prudence reasonably to be expected of a child of that age. P 11yo electrocuted when contact with high voltage terminal. Held: 25% to p and 75% to d. S62(2): confirms the test is an objective test.
