Contributory Negligence and Mitigation: Shall the Two Walk Together?
Yehuda Adar
Abstract
Yehuda Adar
Abstract
This paper discusses and critically examines the close interrelations of two of the main defences to liability in damages for torts and breach of contract. After a careful analysis of the various similarities between the doctrines of contributory (or comparative) negligence and mitigation of damages, and the basic difference between the two, the article reaches the conclusion that there is no justification for the ongoing existence of the mitigation doctrine. It should be abolished, and the doctrine of comparative negligence should be adopted across the board in both tort law and contract law.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper discusses and critically examines the close interrelations of two of the main defences to liability in damages for torts and breach of contract. After a careful analysis of the various similarities between the doctrines of contributory (or comparative) negligence and mitigation of damages, and the basic difference between the two, the article reaches the conclusion that there is no justification for the ongoing existence of the mitigation doctrine. It should be abolished, and the doctrine of comparative negligence should be adopted across the board in both tort law and contract law.
Key concepts: Contributory negligence, Damages, Doctrine, Tort, Liability, Res ipsa loquitur, Law, Delict