CaseSnappy Blog

Crunching Concepts: Venturing into Volenti non fit iniuria

18 September 2024 | CaseSnappy Team

A collection of parked black motorcycles with learner driver (L) plates on them.

Introduction

It's concept crunching time, law enthusiasts! We're back with another edition of our Crunching Concepts series, focusing this time on volenti non fit iniuria, an integral part of English tort law. This cardinal legal concept essentially empowers individuals in their decision-making process, ensuring fairness and preventing unwarranted legal actions. Let's dive in together into the exciting world of volenti non fit iniuria.

What is Volenti non fit iniuria?

Volenti non fit iniuria, an intricate Latin phrase, simply translates to 'to one who consents, no harm is done.' This legal defence in tort law denotes that if someone willingly and consciously puts themselves in a situation where harm might occur, they cannot accuse the other party of causing harm. If a claimant has voluntarily assumed the risk of their injuries, this defence serves as a total obstruction to recovery, effectively eliminating any negligence claims.

Why is Volenti non fit iniuria important?

The importance of this legal principle shouldn't be underrated, and here's why:

1. Balances Rights and Responsibilities: Volenti non fit iniuria ensures a fair equilibrium between parties' rights and obligations, asserting that those who willingly embrace risk should also accept the responsibility for potential outcomes.

2. Restricts Inappropriate Legal Actions: This principle blocks claimants from winning cases where they have knowingly and willingly engaged in risky activities or consented to the risk of injury.

3. Upholds Individual Autonomy: The concept respects an individual's autonomy and freedom to make decisions, allowing them to assume risks and thus reducing unnecessary legal interventions.

Scrutinising Key Cases of Volenti non fit iniuria

Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691: In this case, the Court held that the volenti non fit iniuria defence was not suitable as the claimant, a skilled driver teaching the defendant, had not consented to negligence. Therefore, the defendant was declared responsible for the accident.

ICI Ltd v Shatwell [1965] AC 656: This landmark case illustrated a situation where employees who disregarded safety instructions were injured at work. The court deemed that the employee had consented to the risk, applying the defence of volenti non fit iniuria.

CaseSnappy: Simplifying the Sophisticated

Here at CaseSnappy, we believe in making complex legal concepts digestible for everyone. Whether you're a law rookie itching to learn more or a seasoned professional in the legal field, we're here to enhance your understanding. We hope our deep dive into volenti non fit iniuria has enlightened you.

Join CaseSnappy for free today! Together, we'll continue to clarify confusing legal principles, easing your path through the labyrinth of law, one step at a time.

Get started
By using CaseSnappy, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyse site usage and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information.