LEGAL PRINCIPLE: TORT LAW – Negligence – Contributory Negligence – Pleading Requirements – Whether Use of the Precise Words “Contributory Negligence” is Mandatory
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The 2nd Defendant might not have chosen to use the words 'Contributory Negligence' themselves, but the facts pleaded in those paragraphs have the effect of a plea of contributory negligence. The 2nd Defendant did not need a banner headline 'Contributory Negligence' before proceeding to plead as it had done...
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"The 2nd Defendant might not have chosen to use the words 'Contributory Negligence' themselves, but the facts pleaded in those paragraphs have the effect of a plea of contributory negligence. The 2nd Defendant did not need a banner headline 'Contributory Negligence' before proceeding to plead as it had done..."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A plea of contributory negligence does not require the use of the precise words “contributory negligence.” The court examines the substance of the pleaded facts—if the facts alleged show that the plaintiff contributed to their own harm, the plea is valid. The defendant need not use a “banner headline.” The principle prevents technical objections to well-pleaded defences. The opposing party is not misled if the facts clearly indicate contributory negligence. The court looks at the overall effect of the pleading. The requirement is that the facts are pleaded, not that specific legal terminology is used. The rule promotes substance over form. The defendant must still prove the pleaded facts. The court will not strike out a plea for lack of magic words.