Contributory Negligence

Contributory Negligence is a partial defence in Unintentional Delicts.

They occur when the persuer contributed to the loss, either voluntarily or involuntary, and reduced the liability of the defender. Prior to 1945 it was a complete defence.

Damages would fall to be divided between the two parties.

The onus of proving the pursuers fault lies with the defender, and a level of causation must be shown - but for the actions of the pursuer the damage suffered would not have been as bad as occurred.

Examples
Typically, not wearing a seatbelt would be considered contributory negligence to any injury following a road traffic accident, but there have been exceptions in cases like Mackay v Borthwick where the pursuer did not wear a seatbelt due to a hernia. Travelling in a car boot (Gleeson v Court 2007) was unsurprising found to be contribute to the negligence.

In St George v The Home Office, a prisoner who had epileptic seizures due to drug withdrawal and fell off his bunk was held to have contributed to his negligence.

In Anderson v Lyotier Portejore a skier of limited skill who was convinced to take a run on a difficult course who later became tetraplegic after an accident was held to be contributorily negligent as he did not voice his worries to the instructor.