levo

Tort: Defences and Remedies

Contributory negligence and the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

The old all-or-nothing rule, the apportionment section 1(1) introduced, and what a defendant has to prove — carelessness that contributed to the damage, not necessarily to the accident.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Numbers

What was the position on contributory negligence before 1945?

Key term

What does section 1(1) of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 provide?

Key term

Is contributory negligence a complete defence today?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What was the position on contributory negligence before 1945?

    Model answer

    Contributory negligence was a complete defence at common law. A claimant even slightly at fault recovered nothing, as Butterfield v Forrester (1809) shows.

  2. 2

    What does section 1(1) of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 provide?

    Model answer

    Section 1(1) provides that damages are reduced to such extent as the court thinks just and equitable. The reduction reflects the claimant's share in the responsibility for the damage.

  3. 3

    Is contributory negligence a complete defence today?

    Model answer

    Contributory negligence is a partial defence and reduces the damages only. The claim itself still succeeds.

  4. 4

    What must a defendant prove to establish contributory negligence?

    Model answer

    The defendant must show that the claimant failed to take reasonable care for their own safety. The defendant must also show that the failure contributed to the damage suffered.

  5. 5

    Must the claimant's carelessness contribute to the accident itself?

    Model answer

    The claimant's carelessness need only contribute to the damage rather than to the accident. A failure to wear a seat belt is the classic illustration.

  6. 6

    What did Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd [1952] decide?

    Model answer

    A workman rode on the towbar of a vehicle against instructions and was crushed when another vehicle ran into it. The Court of Appeal reduced his damages, because he had exposed himself to a foreseeable risk.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Tort: Defences and Remedies, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.