Foreword to the First Edition

Extract One of the most important areas of legal practice is the law of negligence. Since claims in negligence—especially personal injury claims—are commonly met by defences of contributory negligence, judges and practitioners have to apply that doctrine day in and day out. In doing so, they are liable to encounter a number of difficulties. Some of these difficulties concern questions of law. To give only a few examples, to what causes of action, other than tortious negligence, does the doctrine of contributory negligence apply? Does it apply in cases of strict liability? Is the test of contributory negligence always objective, or can it sometimes take account of the characteristics of the individual claimant? If the claimant deliberately fails to take reasonable care for his own safety, can he be described as negligent? Is it relevant that the claimant failed to take reasonable care for his own safety, if the risk to which he negligently exposed himself was not a cause of the injuries which he sustained? In what circumstances can a claimant be contributorily negligent by reason of another person’s conduct? How does contributory negligence operate in a situation where the damages recoverable by the claimant are also limited by the principle in SAAMCO (South Australia Asset Management Corp v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191)? If contributory negligence is pleaded along with other defences, such as volenti non fit injuria (that the claimant voluntarily incurred the risk of injury) or ex turpi causa non oritur actio (illegality), how do these defences interact with one another?