Wills v Bell

In the case of Wills v Bell, the plaintiff was a passenger in a car driven by the defendant, which collided with a bridge pylon, resulting in serious injuries to the plaintiff. Both parties were intoxicated at the time of the accident. The plaintiff brought a claim against the defendant for negligence, and the defendant brought a claim against the plaintiff for any damages awarded by the court. The third parties, a hotel and hotelier, were also joined in the proceeding as potential tortfeasors.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, and if so, whether that duty was breached. The court also had to consider whether the illegality of the defendant’s driving negated any duty of care owed to the plaintiff, and whether the plaintiff had full appreciation and acceptance of the risks involved in being driven by the defendant. The court had to evaluate whether the plaintiff was wearing a properly adjusted and fastened seatbelt and whether the third parties were in breach of any duties owed to the plaintiff. Finally, the court had to determine the appropriate quantum of damages for the plaintiff.

The court found that the plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence and that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, which was breached. The court held that the illegality of the defendant’s driving did not negate any duty of care owed to the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff had full appreciation and acceptance of the risks involved in being driven by the defendant. The court found that the plaintiff was wearing a properly adjusted and fastened seatbelt, and that the third parties were not in breach of any duties owed to the plaintiff. The court awarded the plaintiff damages for his injuries.

The court dismissed the defendant’s claim against the third parties and adjourned the proceeding for further hearing in respect of outstanding issues.