In an action for 'Negligence', what does the plantiff need to establish in order to affix civil liability of defendant? What does it take for the maxim 'res ipsa loquitor' to apply?

Establishing Negligence: Elements of Civil Liability

To successfully claim negligence and affix civil liability on the defendant, the plaintiff must establish the following three essential elements:

• Duty of Care: The defendant must have a legal duty to exercise reasonable care towards the plaintiff. This duty arises from the relationship between the parties or from general principles of law. For example, a doctor owes a duty of care to their patient.
• Breach of Duty: The defendant must have breached that duty by failing to meet the standard of care expected of a reasonably prudent person in similar circumstances. This is assessed objectively.
• Causation: There must be a causal link between the defendant’s breach of duty and the plaintiff’s injury. This involves two aspects:
  • Factual Causation (“But-For” Test): The injury would not have occurred ‘but for’ the defendant’s negligence.
  • Proximate Causation: The injury must be a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s negligence.

Additionally, the plaintiff must prove actual damages or injury suffered as a result of the negligence. Without demonstrable harm, there is no cause of action.

Application of 'Res Ipsa Loquitor'

The maxim 'res ipsa loquitor' allows a court to infer negligence even without direct evidence of a specific act of carelessness. However, its application is limited and requires fulfilling specific conditions:

• The accident must be of a kind which does not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence: The event itself suggests negligence. For example, surgical instruments left inside a patient after surgery.
• The instrumentality causing the injury must be under the exclusive control of the defendant: The defendant must have had sole control over the thing that caused the harm, eliminating other potential causes.
• The accident must not be due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff: The plaintiff’s own actions should not have contributed to the injury.

The burden of proof shifts to the defendant to prove that the accident occurred without their negligence once 'res ipsa loquitor' is invoked. It doesn’t automatically establish negligence, but creates a permissible inference.

Example: In Scott v London and St Katherine Docks Co. (1865), flour barrels fell from a crane, injuring a worker. The court applied 'res ipsa loquitor' as such accidents don't usually happen without negligence, and the crane was under the defendant’s control.