Subcategory:
Category:
Words:
554Pages:
2Views:
360Therefore the main element of contributory negligence is unreasonable behavior of the plaintiff This is because his unreasonable behavior in his own safety which results in foreseeable damage to himself In the case of Govinda Raja Anor v Laws it was held that what was done or omitted to be done by the plaintiff in the agony of the moment cannot be fairly treated as negligence and therefore there was no contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff What amounts to contributory negligence is stated expressly by Bucknill J in his judgement in Davis Swan Motor Company He said at the page 308 when one is considering the question of contributory negligence it is not necessary to show that the negligence constituted a breach of duty to the defendant It is sufficient to show lack of reasonable care by the plaintiff for his own safety In the case of Lim Kar Bee v Abdul Latif Bin Ismail the judge stated that in order to plead contributory negligence the plaintiff s act must be the reason for injured plaintiff himself suffered In another case of Choh Nyee Ngah Anor v Syarikat Beruntong Sdn Bhd the defendant pleaded contributory negligence on the part of the deceased It was alleged that the deceased had jumped out of the lorry came to a stop and that had he remained in the driver's cabin he might not have suffered injuries or died So the defence failed here 5 In considering all those elements here the boy named Alvin you hit becomes reason for his own injuries This is because on your side you have been take the sufficient precautionary steps by not driving the car at an excessive speed but in fact comparatively slower than the average speed of other vehicles in the area You just cannot avoid from hitting