The relationship between contributory negligence and recourse between multiple tortfeasors

Abstract

The article raises the issue of the relationship between contributory negligence and recourse between multiple tortfeasors. While using historical and comparative examples, the author concludes that it may be possible to jointly consider these concepts. The Roman law knew neither contributory negligence nor right of recourse which would allow for loss apportionment, and that is associated with punitive features of Roman actions in tort. In Germany, both concepts became widespread no earlier than after the civil law codification, and further case law applied rules on contributory negligence to recourse. In English law, contributory negligence as a partial defence and right of recourse appeared only in the course of the legislative reforms of the 20th century. Considering justifications for the similarity of these concepts offered in the doctrine, the author prefers the view that both imply several parties being outcome responsible for the loss. Upon the analysis of imputing acts of third persons as contributory negligence, it is shown that contributory negligence and right of recourse can be used interchangeably in certain contexts. The observed similarity of the two relation types, if true, by virtue of the equal treatment principle, requires that the same scale be applied to them, and implies admissibility of a parallel study.

References

1. Agarkov, M.M. (1940). The Fault of the Injured Party in the Obligations to Compensate Harm. Soviet State and Law, 3, pp. 70–79 (in Russ.).
2. Antimonov, B.S. (1950). The Consequences of the Fault of the Injured Party in a Civil Offence. Moscow (in Russ.).
3. Varshavskiy, K.M. (1929). Obligations Arising from Causing Harm to Another. Moscow (in Russ.).
4. Krivtsov, A.S. (1902). The General Theory of Damages. Yuriev (in Russ.).
5. Markelova, A.A., Kozyr O . M . (2021). Requisition, Necessity and Victim’s Fault. Commentary on the Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 33-П, 8 July 2021. The Herald of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation, 12, pp. 10–26 (in Russ.).
6. Pokrovskiy, I.A. (2022). Compensation of Harm and its Distribution. Dilemmas of Modern Civil Law in the Field of Liability for Harm and Losses. In. I.A., Pokrovskiy. Selected Works (pp. 206–235). Moscow (in Russ.).
7. Stuchka, P.I. (1929). The Course of Soviet Civil Law. Vol. 2. Moscow (in Russ.).
8. Iablochkov, T.M. (1910). The Influence of the Fault of the Injured Party on the Amount of Damages Compensated to Him. Vol. 1: Theoretical Part. Yaroslavl (in Russ.).
9. Schmoeckel, M., Rückert, J. and Zimmermann, R. (Eds.) (2007). Historisch-kritischer Kommentar zum BGB. Bd. II. § § 241–432. 2. Teilband. § § 305–432. Tübingen (in Germ.).
10. Aumann, P. (1964). Das mitwirkende Verschulden in der neueren juristischen Dogmengeschichte. Hamburg (in Germ.).
11. van Dongen, E.G.D. (2014). Contributory Negligence: A Historical and Comparative Study. Leiden; Boston.
12. Jansen, N. (2003). Die Struktur des Haftungsrechts. Geschichte, Theorie und Dogmatik außervertraglicher Ansprüche auf Schadensersatz (Jus Privatum, Bd. 76). Tübingen (in Germ.).
13. Kaser, M. (1955). Das römische Privatrecht. Erster Abschnitt. Das altrömische, das vorklassische und klassische Recht. München (in Germ).
14. Looschelders, D. (1999). Die Mitverantwortlichkeit des Geschädigten im Privatrecht. Tübingen (in Germ.).
15. Meier, S. (2010). Gesamtschulden — Entstehung und Regreß in historischer und vergleichender Perspektive. Tübingen (in Germ.).
16. Oftinger, K. (1975). Schweizerisches Haftpflichtrecht. 1. Band: Allgemeiner Teil. Zürich (in Germ.).
17. Rother, W. (1965). Haftungsbeschränkung im Schadensrecht. Berlin (in Germ.).
18. Selb, W. (1984). Mehrheiten von Gläubigern und Schuldnern. Tübingen (in Germ.).
19. Magnus, U. and Martín-Casals, M. (Eds.) (2004). Unification of Tort Law: Contributory Negligence. Hague.
20. Rogers, W.V.H. (Ed.) (2004). Unification of Tort Law: Multiple Tortfeasors. Hague.
21. Venzmer, K. (1960). Mitverursachung und Mitverschulden im Schadensersatzrecht: mit zahlreichen Beispielen und bildlichen Darstellungen der wichtigsten Straßenverkehrsvorgänge. München (in Germ.).
22. Williams, G.L. (1951). Joint torts and contributory negligence: a study of concurrent fault in Great Britain, Ireland and the Common-Law dominions. London.