Defence Against Negligence - Essay Example

It can be concluded that though a minor, he voluntarily accepted the risk involved in skiing. There was thus an express assumption of risk. That is supported by what was decided in Murphy vs. Steeplehouse Amusement Company, 250 N.Y. 479. The court ruled that one is solely responsible for the outcomes of an activity in which the person takes part if the dangers are obvious and necessary.

Contributory negligence makes the defendants not entirely liable. Neal’s’ conduct of skiing while being inexperienced and too young falls below a certain standard necessary for his protection, and this conduct cooperated with the defendant's negligence of selling the skies to a minor who was also inexperienced. That eventually harmed Neal. Neal would have avoided the injuries had he gone for lessons. That leads to another defense available to the defendants. It is comparative negligence, which in other words would be non-absolute contributory negligence. With this type of defense, Neal would not recover by the percentage in which he was at fault for his damage. In this way, the damages are shared between parties according to their contributions.