Effect of contributory negligence on damages (Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 s.1)

Section 1(1) of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 provides that where a person suffers damage partly as a result of his own fault and partly as a result of the fault of another, his claim is not defeated by reason of his own fault. Instead, the damages are reduced to such extent as the court thinks just and equitable having regard to the claimant's share in the responsibility for the damage. Under s.1(2) the court finds and records the total damages that would have been recoverable if the claimant had not been at fault, here £40,000, and then applies the reduction. Faisal's failure to look while crossing contributed to his injury, so his damages will be reduced, but he will still recover from Grace. The percentage is a matter for the court's judgment on the facts, weighing the causative potency and blameworthiness of each party's conduct; there is no fixed or automatic figure.

Why A is wrong: The 1945 Act abolished the old rule that contributory negligence was a complete defence; the claim is not defeated.

Why B is wrong: There is no automatic 50% reduction; the court decides what is just and equitable on the facts.

Why C is wrong: A greater fault on the defendant's side affects the size of the reduction, but does not prevent a reduction where the claimant was also at fault.

Why E is wrong: Contributory negligence concerns the claimant's failure to take reasonable care for his own safety; he need not owe the defendant a duty.