In this article you will learn about Volenti Non Fit Injuria in Tort.
What is Volenti Non Fit Injuria?
The maxim Volenti Non Fit Injuria states that ‘to a willing person, it is not a wrong’ which basically means that no wrong is done to one who consents. This legal maxim holds that if a person knowingly or willingly and voluntarily risks danger, he cannot recover for any resulting injury. This principle was the common-law foundation for the assumption of the risk doctrine. If there is consent for the injury by the injured or aggrieved party no defence can be claimed. If damage or injury has been caused with consent no damages can be claimed.
Elements of Volenti Non Fit Injuria
To apply the defence of volenti non fit injuria there are some elements or conditions which should be present in a case. And when they are fulfilled, this defence can be taken to prevent liability.
The two essential elements in this defence are :
- The plaintiff has the knowledge of the risk.
- The plaintiff has voluntarily agreed to suffer the harm with the knowledge of risk.
In cases of consent having been obtained by fraud, the defence of volenti non fit injuria will not apply and the defendant will be held liable for the wrong done by him. In R v. Williams 1983, the defendant, a music teacher, was teaching music to a 16-year-old student and convinced her to have sexual intercourse with him by telling her that it will help her in improving her voice and singing. The court held that it was a compulsion and 16-year-old consent was not valid as it did not carry consent elements. The defendant was held liable for the injury caused because the consent was obtained by fraud. Consent must be free. It must not be affected by coercion, under influence, misrepresentation, duress, fraud, mistake, etc.
Elements of consent :
- There must be a chance of contemplation(choice of thinking process).
- There must be two alternatives.
- There must be a chance of selecting between the given alternatives(options).
- Beneficial interest is also told or conveyed by the receiver-(who takes consent).
The consent may be expressed or implied. Implied consent may be inferred from the conduct of parties. Express consent may be written, oral, etc.
In the case of Padmavati vs. Dugganaika 1975, Dugganaika was the driver. Two strangers had asked for a lift in the jeep of the defendants and while travelling in it one of the screws of the wheel of the jeep was defected and fell out, as a result, the jeep crashed and it caused grievous hurt and later on the death of one of the plaintiffs who was Padmavati's husband. The Court held that the defence of volenti non fit injuria will apply and thus the defendants were not liable because by there was implied consent given by the plaintiffs to bear suffer or harm and on sitting in the jeep the plaintiffs had assumed the risk of being injured in an accident.
This article on Types of Damages in Tort is contributed by Dipshikha Anand. If you like LawStudyPoint.com do follow us on our Twitter handle.