Res ipsa loquitur: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
In the law of evidence, a convenient Latin maxim to allow tribunals of fact to arrive at conclusions without any actual evidence. | In the law of evidence, a convenient Latin maxim to allow tribunals of fact to arrive at conclusions without any actual evidence. | ||
It comes from the old tort case of {{citer|Byrne|Boadle|2 Hurl. & Colt.|722|}}, 1863,in which a barrel of flour fell from a second-story loft and bopped the plaintiff on the head. Though there were no witnesses as to how the barrel came to be falling out of the loft the judge felt the fact that | It comes from the old tort case of {{citer|Byrne|Boadle|2 Hurl. & Colt.|722|}}, 1863, in which a barrel of flour fell from a second-story loft and bopped the plaintiff on the head. | ||
Though there were no witnesses as to how the barrel came to be falling out of the loft the judge felt the fact that it ''had'' fallen out of the loft of itself demonstrated a breach of the duty of care and did not require the plaintiff to prove it. | |||
{{quote|“It is the duty of persons who keep barrels in a warehouse to take care that they do not roll out, and I think that such a case would, beyond all doubt, afford ''prima facie'' evidence of negligence. A barrel could not roll out of a warehouse without some [[negligence]], and to say that a plaintiff who is injured by it must call witnesses from the warehouse to prove negligence seems to me preposterous.”}} | {{quote|“It is the duty of persons who keep barrels in a warehouse to take care that they do not roll out, and I think that such a case would, beyond all doubt, afford ''prima facie'' evidence of negligence. A barrel could not roll out of a warehouse without some [[negligence]], and to say that a plaintiff who is injured by it must call witnesses from the warehouse to prove negligence seems to me preposterous.”}} | ||
Revision as of 12:02, 8 April 2023
|
The JC’s guide to pithy Latin adages
|
Res ipsa loquitur
/ˈrɛz ɪpsɑːr ˈlɒkwɪtə/ (maxim.)
Things speak for themselves. No explanation needed. I have seen everything I need to see and I’m going home.
In the law of evidence, a convenient Latin maxim to allow tribunals of fact to arrive at conclusions without any actual evidence. It comes from the old tort case of Byrne v Boadle (2 Hurl. & Colt.) 722 , 1863, in which a barrel of flour fell from a second-story loft and bopped the plaintiff on the head.
Though there were no witnesses as to how the barrel came to be falling out of the loft the judge felt the fact that it had fallen out of the loft of itself demonstrated a breach of the duty of care and did not require the plaintiff to prove it.
“It is the duty of persons who keep barrels in a warehouse to take care that they do not roll out, and I think that such a case would, beyond all doubt, afford prima facie evidence of negligence. A barrel could not roll out of a warehouse without some negligence, and to say that a plaintiff who is injured by it must call witnesses from the warehouse to prove negligence seems to me preposterous.”