Skip to main content

Inevitable Accident is defense in Tort

 


Inevitable Accident is defense in Tort

By: Anjali Tiwari

The unavoidable accident, also known as the inevitable accident, states that a person cannot be held accountable for an accident that was not foreseeable despite his best efforts. According to the law, a high level of prudence is not required; ordinary caution is adequate. 

For Example: If X was driving a car and was completely alert and cautious, but his automobile abruptly lost its balance owing to a technical breakdown and collided with a pedestrian. In this situation, the driver would not be held accountable because he took all reasonable precautions. It was inescapable that the accident occurred.

Act of God can also be sometimes inevitable accidents.  Example: Acts of God can sometimes be classified as unavoidable accidents. For instance, Y was driving an automobile with all reasonable caution. The road suddenly collapsed due to intense rain and storms, and Y's car collided with several pedestrians. The driver would not be held accountable in this case as well. He couldn't do anything about it because it was absolutely out of his control.

An unavoidable accident, according to Sir Frederick Pollock, is “not avoidable by any such care as a reasonable man, executing such an act, could be expected to take.”

It is necessary for the defendant to establish two things in order to employ the defense of inevitable accident: 

1. The defendant had no intention of doing anything wrong.

2. The collision could not have been averted even if adequate precautions had been taken. The defendant can clearly deny any responsibility but it’s difficult to satisfy. The most prominent defense used by the defendant is that there was an unanticipated blackout just before the crash. In that case, the defendant has to prove that there was a sudden medical illness. 

LIMMASOL

The defendant was driving down the street when he suffered a heart attack. He collided with a passer-by and onlooker as a result of his sudden arrest. The case was taken to court, and the defendant claimed that the collision was unavoidable. He even presented the court with his medical history of cardiac arrest to back up his case. However, the judge ruled against the defendant. The defendant could not prove that the arrest was unexpected at the time of the accident, which was a need for the plea of inevitable accident, according to the honorable judge. Second, the defendant was well-known for his cardiac arrest condition. He should not have driven in the first place. As a result, the mishap was not unexpected and might have been averted. As a result of driving while suffering from a serious sickness, he should be held responsible for the accident.

Hidasi v. Hidasi,. 2011 BCSC 583

The second case law is Hidasi v. Hidasi, where the defense of an inevitable accident was accepted by the court. The plaintiff in this case is the woman, while the defendant is the husband. Both the husband and the wife were on a mountain road. Because the defendant was aware of the slick road, he took all necessary precautions. He was moving at a speed of less than 100 kilometers per hour. However, the car's balance was lost in some way. The defendant applied the emergency brakes, but they were ineffective, and the car collided with a nearby barrier, injuring the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the husband, alleging that he drove erratically and failed to take the necessary precautions. The defendant claimed that the accident was inescapable. The court accepted the defense's argument that the car lost control due to a mechanical problem that was completely beyond the defendant's control.

Reference:

1. Hidasi v. Hidasi,. 2011 BCSC 583




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree