What Is Volenti Non Fit Injuria (Consent)?
Learn what volenti non fit injuria means in tort law, when consent is a complete defence, and why knowing about a risk alone is not enough to establish it.
Volenti non fit injuria means “to a willing person, no injury is done”. In tort law, it is a complete defence where the claimant freely agreed to accept the risk that caused their injury. If the defence succeeds, the defendant pays no damages for that claim.
What must the defendant show?
The defendant must show that the claimant knew the nature and extent of the risk and voluntarily agreed to accept it. Consent can be express, such as a clear agreement, or implied from the claimant’s conduct. But knowing about a danger is not, by itself, the same as consenting to it.
In Smith v Baker, a worker continued working despite knowing that stones were being swung above him. His knowledge of the danger did not mean he had freely agreed to accept the risk of injury. By contrast, in Morris v Murray, a passenger who chose to fly with a pilot he knew was heavily drunk was held to have accepted the obvious risk.
For example, suppose a spectator chooses to watch a sporting event from a designated area and is struck by a ball. The court would ask whether the spectator accepted the ordinary risks of watching, not assume consent to every kind of careless conduct. The precise risk matters: agreement to one foreseeable danger does not automatically cover a different one.
How is it different from contributory negligence?
Volenti is a complete defence: a successful defendant pays no damages. Contributory negligence means the claimant’s own lack of care helped cause the injury; it reduces damages rather than removing them altogether.
Exam mistake to avoid: do not write that a claimant consented simply because they saw a risk or carried on with an activity. Explain what they understood and whether their choice to accept that particular risk was genuinely voluntary.
