Lane v Holloway [1968] 1 QB 379
Judgement for the case Lane v Holloway
Table Of Contents
Plaintiff challenged Defendant to a fight and hit Defendant lightly, before Plaintiff hit Plaintiff severely, causing Plaintiff serious injury, for which Plaintiff sued.
CA held that since Plaintiff had struck a blow out of all proportion, the defences of “ex turpi causa” and “volenti” do not apply.
Lord Denning MR
Even if the fight started by being unlawful, I think that one of them can sue the other for damages for a subsequent injury if it was inflicted by a weapon or savage blow out of all proportion to the occasion.
I agree that in an ordinary fight with fists there is no cause of action to either of them for any injury suffered. The reason is that each of the participants in a fight voluntarily takes upon himself the risk of incidental injuries to himself. Volenti non fit injuria. But he does not take on himself the risk of a savage blow out of all proportion to the occasion.
For Further Study on Lane v Holloway
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
Tort Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. ...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.