The Meaning of this Maxim is that “Damage suffered by consent is not a cause of action” in other words whenever a person suffers any damage voluntarily out of his own consent it will not render him with any cause of action. A simple translation of this sentence from Latin to English turns out to “No injury is caused to a willing person”.
- When a person purchases share of a company listed in the stock market and the price of that particular stock falls due to market volatility or any other reason such person is not eligible to claim compensation from the said company
- Z trespasses on land of X, and suffers injury Z here in this case cannot sue X for any damages as he has himself consented to such damages by trespassing into X’s Land.
- Illot Vs. Wilkes, in this case the plaintiff suffered some injuries due to spring guns present in the Defendants Property, Illot, the Plaintiff could not claim for damages in the said incident as the Damage was suffered by the Plaintiff’s own action.
- Dann Vs. Hamilton, In this case the plaintiff agreed to travel in the Defendants Driver’s car who was intoxicated and subsequently the car met with an accident in which the Driver died and Plaintiff suffered injuries, the plaintiff sued the Driver’s representative and the Defence of Volenti Non Fit Injuria did not fructify in the court of law as though the Plaintiff knew of Driver’s intoxication still it was the Driver’s duty to fare the Plaintiff safely.
- Haynes Vs. Harwood:- The Plaintiff being a Policeman on duty in a street saw a horse-cart coming his way which he rushed to stop and in that process saved people on the said busy street and suffered some injuries, the Defendant in this case used the defence of “Volenti Non Fit Injuria” however the court ruled in the Plaintiff’s favour.