General Defenses to Liability in Torts



In a suit in tort, the plaintiff is required to prove the essential elements of the tort which the defendant is alleged to have committed. Even when the plaintiff proves the elements of the tort, the defendant may avoid his liability by taking the plea to some of the recognized general defenses or exceptions. These are some of the general defenses which may be taken against the action for various wrongs.

1. Volenti non fit injuria
2. Plaintiff, the wrong doer
3. Inevitable accident
4. Act of God
5. Private Defense
6. Mistake
7. Necessity
8. Statutory Authority
9. Contributory negligence
10. Parental and Quasi-parental acts
11. Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Acts
12. Executive acts
13. Acts causing light harm

1. Volenti non fit injuria or the defense of ‘Consent’:

One of the recognized general defense is that the plaintiff consented to the doing of an act which caused harm or injury to him, the plaintiff will not get any remedy under the law of torts and the defendant would not be liable. No man can enforce a right which he had voluntarily waived of or abandoned.

2. Plaintiff, the wrong doer:

Under the law of torts the principle says that if the plaintiff does an act unlawfully, he cannot approach the court and expect any compensation. Based on maxim ‘ Ex turnip cause non oritur actio’ which means that no cause of action arises out of immoral or unlawful clause.

3. Inevitable accident:

Accident means an unexpected injury and Inevitable accident means an accident which cannot be avoided by any precautions as a reasonable person would do. Thus the accident cannot be called as Inevitable accident if an accident would have been avoided by a reasonable person by taking certain precautions at the time of accident.

4. Act of God or Vis major:

Act of God is also one of the recognized general defenses to liability in tort. An act or escape caused directly by natural cause without human interventions is known as Act of God. Any amount of human foresight or skill to avoid the act or escape could not have prevented the damage.

5. Private Defense:

Reasonable private defense is one of the recognized general defenses to tortious liability. Law allows to use reasonable private defense of one’s person and property and if any injury happens during this process, there would be no liability of the defendant. But the private defense should be reasonable and should be valid.

6. Mistake:

One of the important maxim in law is ‘Ignorance of law is no excuse’ Mistake of fact and law, both are no defense under law of torts. It is no defenses to say that the person honestly believed in something that there was justification for the same but in fact no such justification existed. To this rule, there are some exceptions when the defendant may be able to avoid liability by showing that he acted under an honest but mistaken belief. For example, for the wrong of malicious prosecution.

7. Necessity:

An act of causing damage if its done under necessity to prevent a greater harm and it is done with the good intention and knowledge, this is accepted as a recognized general defense in law of torts.

8. Statutory Authority:

The damage resulting from an act which the legislature authorities is not actionable even though it would otherwise be a tort. When an act is done under statutory authority it is a complete defense and injured party has no remedy to claim compensation.

9. Contributory negligence:

This is a legal doctrine in which the law bars the plaintiff from recovering any compensation for others negligence if he himself was also negligent in causing the harm or injury. Contributory negligence is also called as Comparative negligence. Contributory negligence is frequently pleaded when there is a charge of negligence.

10. Parental and Quasi-parental acts:

Parents are authorized to inflict moderate and reasonable punishment upon their children in a view to correct, chastise or train them. The punishment should be reasonable and moderate.

11. Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Acts:

No action lies against a Judge for acts done or words spoken in the exercise of his judicial functions. This immunity is provided to the judges to exercise their judicial functions with full liberty with independence and without fear of consequence of judicial functions. Persons exercising quasi judicial authority are also immune from civil action provided they observe the rules of natural justice.

12. Executive acts:

No action will lie against an officer who executes the orders of a public authority which are valid. This immunity is based upon the principle that the officers need to perform their duties independently and without any fear to carry on the administration.

13. Acts causing light harm:

This principle is based on the maxim ‘de minims non rural lex’ which means that law takes no notice of acts with less or no harm and irrelevant matters. For example, if someone pushes incidentally each other without any bad intention while getting on to a bus which is crowded. But the maxim will not apply if any legal rights of the person were infringed.