Assumption of risk is a defense arguing that the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily accepted a particular danger.
Why It Matters
This defense matters because tort liability can be reduced or defeated when the plaintiff understood the risk and chose to face it anyway. The effect depends on the jurisdiction and the facts.
Where It Appears
Assumption of risk appears in negligence cases involving sports, hazardous activities, recreation, waivers, and other situations where a person knowingly encounters danger.
Practical Example
A participant joins an activity with an obvious and understood danger that is part of the activity itself. If an injury follows, assumption of risk may become part of the liability analysis.
How It Differs From Nearby Terms
Comparative negligence compares the fault of both sides. Assumption of risk focuses more specifically on whether the plaintiff knowingly accepted the danger. Contributory negligence is another fault-based defense with a different legal effect in some jurisdictions.
Related Terms
Knowledge Check
- What does assumption of risk argue? It argues that the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily accepted a particular danger.
- How is assumption of risk different from comparative negligence? Assumption of risk focuses on knowingly accepting danger, while comparative negligence allocates fault between the parties.