In Ontario, this situation is called contributory negligence. The term
“contributory” is defined by Webster’s as “helping to bring about a
result”. This can obviously be defined as you contributing to your own
injuries by not wearing your seatbelt. It does not mean that you are
responsible for your injuries. The question to be asked is: did you fail
to take reasonable precautions for your own safety and therefore
contribute to your own injures?
Engineering studies have shown over and over for the past 30 years that
seatbelts worn properly will minimize injuries that occur in accidents.
They have never been shown to worsen injury. They have been shown to
produce injuries – but at the same time they have prevented more serious
injuries. Transport Canada as well as the leading auto manufacturers
have supported these conclusions by numerous tests carried out over the
past 30 years. All Canadian provinces have compulsory legislation that
require occupants of a car to wear a seatbelt, it is a provincial
offence to not wear a seatbelt.
How does you not wearing a seatbelt play out legally? When you are
involved in an accident, the onus is on the defendant driver to prove
that you failed to wear a seatbelt and that if you had been wearing your
seatbelt, your injuries would have been prevented or lessened. The
onus then shifts to you to show that is was unreasonable to wear a
seatbelt or that by wearing a seatbelt the injuries would have been
worse or the same, which is a very tough argument.
In 2003 the Ontario Court of Appeal decided a very important case. This
case, called Snushall v. Fulsang is the seminal Ontario decision that
gave guidance to lawyers concerning victims injured in automobile
accidents that were not wearing seatbelts.
The Court relied on a large number of cases that had developed over the
years in considering how to determine a plaintiff’s share of
contributory negligence for failing to wear a seatbelt. They determined
after a study of a large number of past cases that a reasonable range
of contributory negligence would range from 5% to 25%. This means if
you are paid damages (money) for pain and suffering, the money paid to
you would be reduced by a range of 5% to 25%. Essentially, it must be
shown that your injuries would have been reduced had the seatbelt been
worn. The Court suggested that the contributory negligence of a
plaintiff not wearing a seatbelt should not exceed 25%. This decision
was helpful to injured victims that were not wearing seatbelts in that
if they proceeded to a trial there would be a cap on their exposure of
25% reduction.
Obviously there are difficult situations to analyze such as when a
person is killed in a car accident. If the accident is severe enough to
completely demolish an automobile, it may become an argument as to
whether or not they were wearing seatbelt and proper engineers and
experts must be utilized to assess the seatbelt contraptions and
injuries caused to the body of the deceased. There is also the issue of
whether the vehicle equipped with lap and shoulder belts were
“functioning” at the time of the accident. If this were an issue the
same as the above would apply. Evidence must shown by experts that the
seatbelt was functioning or not and the tensioning apparatus’ were
fastly secured. There is a real possibility that if an accident is
devastating enough then either the recoil mechanisms, shoulder harness,
restraining harness, tensioning apparatus, recoil mechanisms, seatbelt
clip or the general mechanics of the seatbelt may be damaged or were in
fact not properly working at the time of the accident. The Court of
Appeal noted that 25% is the very high end of the range of contribution
which is mostly allocated in cases where 100% of the loss could have
been avoided had the seatbelt been worn. When people die in car
accidents and it is unknown whether or not they were wearing a seatbelt,
it is difficult to ascertain whether or not death could have been
avoided, depending on the severity and mechanics of impact. That being
said, the majority of car accidents that occur in Ontario do not involve
death. Normally car accident lawyers with experience are able to
assess a proportionate liability in your case and deal with it
accordingly. Therefore, if you have been injured in a car accident and
you were not wearing a seatbelt, it is important that you speak to a
lawyer because not all is lost.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact Matt Lalande at
Haber & Associates.