Introduction
Res ipsa loquitur is a famous maxim which means "the thing speaks for itself". This maxim plays an important role in the law of tort and the evidence law. It allows plaintiffs to make a prima facie case of negligence without providing direct evidence of the defendant's wrong conduct. The incident's circumstances are considered to be sufficiently careless that the event itself is considered negligent or careless.
The doctrine of “Res Ipsa Loquitur” may applies in few situations such as:
1. Sole control of the incident was under the control of the defendant (wrongdoer).
2. Accidents would not have happened, if the caretakers were careful (There should be negligence).
When this doctrine is applicable in the case, the burden of proof shifts from the plaintiff (victim) to the defendant. Then the defendant has to disprove the accusation upon him with facts.
History of Res Ipsa Loquitur
This principle was established in the era of English Common Law. At that time, it develops as a remedy to hold the accused liable for the offence which he/she has done. It also helps to create prima facie by which easily find out the wrongdoer of the case.
This doctrine gained popularity in the early 19th century by the landmark judgement of Byrne v Boadle (1863). In this case, there was a barrel which fell from a window and the passerby got injured. Court was stated that the accident would not have occurred without negligence, hence the court applied the “res ipsa loquitur” doctrine in this case.
The case of Scott v London and St. Katherine Docks Co. (1865) made this doctrine applicable to negligence cases in American Courts. Later, this doctrine of Res ipsa Loquitur, became a popular way for the plaintiff in order to establish a prima facie case even without solid proof of negligence.
To made applicable “Res Ipsa Loquitur” doctrine, there is few elements are required which are given below:-
(1) Negligence should always be there, without negligence the incident would not have occurred.
(2) The instrument or circumstance causing the harm is under the defendant's sole control and
(3) The plaintiff's own conduct did not give rise to the incident.
(4) The defendant owes a duty of care towards the plaintiff which he has violated (not perform the duty).
Res Ipsa Loquitur eases the plaintiff’s burden of proof, and his performance has been subject to judicial review. Courts have refined and clarified its principles to ensure that the interests of plaintiffs and defendants are balanced. Definition remains central to tort law, allowing for a more flexible and efficient approach to establishing negligence where direct evidence may not be available.
Essentials of Res Ipsa Loquitur
Res Ipsa Loquitur is a legal doctrine derived from the common law, recognized and applied in Indian law in certain circumstances "a thing speaks for itself" means it applies when facts regarding an incident show negligence even in the absence of direct evidence.
1. Unusual Events:
The doctrine requires that the conduct is in question if there is negligence or carelessness. In the Indian case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v Subhagwanti (1966) the clock-tower in Chandni Chowk, Delhi was collapsed. As a result it causes the death of several people. The court said that the “municipality of delhi” has a duty to maintain the tower. The structure was 80 years old while its normal life was 40-45 years. He is presumed to have acted negligently.
2. Defendant's Exclusive Control:
An aggravating instrument or condition must be under the defendant’s complete control at the time of the incident. Nihal Kaur v/s Director, P.G.I, Chandigarh, In this case the scissors were left in the body of the patient by the doctor. Due to the negligence of the doctor, the patient died during the operation. The Court explained that res ipsa loquitur applied here, because there is a reasonable connection between the accident and the alleged negligence of the defendant. The court held the defendant liable & awarded 1.2 Lakh rupees to the family of the plaintiff.
3. Non-Contribution by Plaintiff:
It is to be noted that the plaintiff's own conduct should not be contributed to the incident. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. Krishnan (1981) was a case in which an accident happened between two buses. They scraped each other in the way that the left hand of two passengers of the bus were cut off below the shoulder joint.
It was held that the accident speaks for itself, there is negligence on the part of both the drivers of the vehicles. The Court clarified that res ipsa loquitur would apply here because the plaintiff’s conduct did not play a role in the damage.
While Res Ipsa Loquitur is recognized in India, its application depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case. The aforesaid case law shows how the doctrine has been interpreted and applied in Indian law.
Res Ipsa Loquitur Examples
Medical malpractice disputes are commonly related to the principle of res ipsa loquitur. However, this principle can also be used in other situations which we have already discussed below. There are two examples of this doctrine given below:
1. Medical malpractice: for example you go into the hospital for the finger surgery but after waking up you see that your foot got injured. However, you just visit for the finger surgery, hence this situation proves and speaks for itself that something wrong happened. Even if you do not have concrete evidence, this circumstance raises the possibility that someone made a mistake.
2. Other scenarios: Let assume a microwave or any device is thrown out of an apartment window and strikes you while you are on the sidewalk next to the building. According to the res ispa loquitur principle, it is acceptable that you did not see who threw the object out of the window.
In some cases, the accident speaks for itself even if no one witnessed it. However, In this case it is clear that you did not cause your own harm. This implies that someone may have acted irresponsibly or made a mistake. Your res ipsa loquitur claim is likely to be successful if you can show that the defendant had whole control over the instrumentality.
Conclusion
In fact, while Res Ipsa Loquitur is a precious tool in negligence cases, it does not always apply universally. Courts carefully keep in mind the specific circumstances in every case, when its application is required.
In exception, the doctrine can be inapplicable while the plaintiff contributes to the incident or harm, when a third party is involved, the occasion could occur without negligence, or the instrumentality isn't always completely controlled with the aid of the defendant.
