Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principle:
1.1. Volenti non fit injura is defence to negligence.
Factual Situation: K was a friend of L and was teaching her to drive. Prior to such an arrangement, K had sought assurances from L that appropriate insurance had been purchased in the event of an accident. On the third day, L was executing a simple maneuver at slow speed when she panicked which resulted in the car crashing into a lamp-post injuring K. L was subsequently convicted of driving without due care and attention. L denied liability to pay compensation to K on the ground of volenti non fit injuria and also that she was just learning to drive and was not in complete control of the vehicle. Decide.
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principle:
1.1. Volenti non fit injura is defence to negligence.
Factual Situation: K was a friend of L and was teaching her to drive. Prior to such an arrangement, K had sought assurances from L that appropriate insurance had been purchased in the event of an accident. On the third day, L was executing a simple maneuver at slow speed when she panicked which resulted in the car crashing into a lamp-post injuring K. L was subsequently convicted of driving without due care and attention. L denied liability to pay compensation to K on the ground of volenti non fit injuria and also that she was just learning to drive and was not in complete control of the vehicle. Decide.
The correct option is A L is liable as the defence of volenti non fit injura was not applicable. Secondly, that the duty of care owed by a learner driver to the public (including passengers) was to be measured against the same standard that would be applied to any other driver
L is liable as the defence of volenti non fit injuria was not acceptable. Secondly, that the duty of care owned by a learned driver to the public (including passengers) was to be measured against the same standard that would be applied to any other driver. L even though was a learner driver had a duty just like any other driver to undertake proper care towards the public and co-passengers (K). She will be held liable for the injuries caused to K. Volenti non fit injuria will not be applicable to L.
L is liable as the defence of volenti non fit injuria was not acceptable. Secondly, that the duty of care owned by a learned driver to the public (including passengers) was to be measured against the same standard that would be applied to any other driver. L even though was a learner driver had a duty just like any other driver to undertake proper care towards the public and co-passengers (K). She will be held liable for the injuries caused to K. Volenti non fit injuria will not be applicable to L.
