Arguments Often Raised By Defendant In Personal Injury Case

Some people jump at any chance to sue someone else, in hopes of winning money. Sometimes there is no sound basis for such a lawsuit. Defense lawyers appreciate that fact, and have learned how to present standard defenses.

The defense that got modified over time

One defense has been used for so long, that it has been altered, and then the altered version got modified in some locations. It makes sense that a defendant should not have to compensate a victim to the full extent, if that same victim helped to cause the accident that triggered the dispute.

In line with that thought, the early legal system created the defense known as contributory negligence. According to that principle, the plaintiff did not get any money as compensation if he or she acted in a way that worked to trigger the injury-causing accident.

Some people saw that approach as unfair, and thus created comparative negligence. According to that new approach, the percentage to which a victim has contributed to the occurrence of an accident determines the amount of compensation that the victim wins.

Still, some objected to that alternative approach. They suggested adopting a modified version. In that modified version, the victim can be given a part of the compensation, if he or she has not contributed more than 50% of the actions that caused the accident.

Lack of mitigation

The legal system expects the injured victim to mitigate the injuries by seeing a doctor as soon as possible. Victims that fail to follow that guidance risk being denied a part of the compensation that they might otherwise have won.

Assumption of risk

Accident Lawyer in Burnaby knows that this defense can be tried if the injured party chose to take part in a risky activity, and then got injured while participating in that same activity. This defends works, if the injury sustained by the victim corresponds with the nature of the risk that was mentioned in any warning.

For instance, a football player might be warned about the possibility of suffering a brain injury, due to the movement of the player’s head inside the helmet. Consequently, if the same player did sustain a concussion, then he would have trouble suing the coach or the team’s manager. Either of them could claim that the injured player had invited the risk.

Suppose, however, that the same player got hurt when someone on the opposing team used rough and illegal tactics, in an effort to tackle him. Suppose, to that the opponent’s use of those tactics caused the targeted player to get injured.

In that case, the injured party might sue the opponents’ team. The opponent would have trouble developing a defense, because there had been no proper warning