5.3 Res Ipsa Loquitur

Res ipsa loquitur is a legal doctrine that helps plaintiffs prove negligence without direct evidence. It applies when an incident wouldn't normally happen without negligence, the defendant had control, and the plaintiff didn't contribute to it.

This doctrine shifts the burden of proof to the defendant. While it doesn't guarantee a win for the plaintiff, it can be a powerful tool in cases where direct evidence of negligence is hard to come by.

Res Ipsa Loquitur

Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur

Top images from around the web for Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur

• 

  Burden Of Proof - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine in Proofing Process of Environmental Dispute | Hang Tuah Law Journal View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tort Law - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 6 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Burden Of Proof - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine in Proofing Process of Environmental Dispute | Hang Tuah Law Journal View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur

• 

  Burden Of Proof - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine in Proofing Process of Environmental Dispute | Hang Tuah Law Journal View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tort Law - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 6 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Burden Of Proof - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine in Proofing Process of Environmental Dispute | Hang Tuah Law Journal View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Latin phrase meaning "the thing speaks for itself" used in tort law, specifically in negligence cases
• Allows plaintiffs to establish a prima facie case of negligence without direct evidence of the defendant's negligent conduct based on the premise that the incident would not have occurred in the absence of negligence
• Shifts the burden of proof to the defendant to prove that they were not negligent, an exception to the general rule that the plaintiff must prove the defendant's negligence

Elements of res ipsa loquitur

• Incident must be of a type that ordinarily does not occur in the absence of negligence (uncommon and not expected to happen without negligence)
• Incident must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant (defendant must have had sole control over the cause of the incident)
  • May be satisfied even if the defendant had control at the time of the alleged negligent act, rather than at the time of the incident
• Incident must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff (plaintiff must not have contributed to the cause of the incident through their own actions)

Application in hypothetical scenarios

• Pedestrian walking on a sidewalk struck by a flowerpot falling from a window above (res ipsa loquitur may apply because flowerpots do not ordinarily fall from windows absent negligence, owner of the building has exclusive control over the flowerpot, and pedestrian did not contribute to the incident)
• Patient undergoes surgery and a surgical instrument is left inside their body (res ipsa loquitur may apply because surgical instruments are not ordinarily left inside patients absent negligence, surgical team had exclusive control over the instruments during the surgery, and patient was under anesthesia and did not contribute to the incident)

Effect on burden of proof

• In a typical negligence case, the plaintiff has the burden of proving the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, the defendant breached that duty, the breach caused the plaintiff's injury, and the plaintiff suffered damages as a result
• When res ipsa loquitur applies, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to prove that they were not negligent
  • If the defendant cannot provide evidence to rebut the presumption of negligence, the plaintiff may prevail
• Doctrine does not automatically result in a victory for the plaintiff (defendant may still present evidence to show that they were not negligent or that the plaintiff contributed to the incident)