Gross negligence is when a person or entity recklessly neglects the safety of others. To prove liability, a plaintiff must show duty of care, blatant breach, damage, and causal link.
Gross negligence occurs when a person or entity acts recklessly or willfully to neglect the safety of others. It is more serious than mere negligence, which is simply the failure to exercise reasonable care. For example, if a semi-truck driver runs a stop sign and hits a car, the driver can be held liable for negligence. Suppose, however, that the driver had also been drinking alcohol and was well over the legal limit. In this circumstance, the driver can be held liable for gross negligence because the driver has failed to use even the slightest diligence in driving the semi-trailer.
In order to prove gross negligence liability, a plaintiff generally has to prove several things. First, the plaintiff typically has to show that the defendant has a duty of care to the plaintiff or the general public to act in a certain way. For example, say a plaintiff is rock climbing with an outdoor adventure company, which supplies all climbing equipment and an instructor. The adventure company would have an obligation on the plaintiff to ensure that any equipment provided is in working order.
Second, the plaintiff typically must show that the defendant has blatantly and indifferently breached his duty to the plaintiff. This element is different from negligence, which simply requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant failed to use reasonable care. In the rock climbing example above, for example, suppose the instructor carelessly forgot to properly strap on the plaintiff’s climbing gear, and the plaintiff falls and breaks his legs as a result. The instructor and the company may be liable for negligence. If, however, the instructor has provided equipment that he knew could break at any time, the instructor and the company may be liable for gross negligence.
The third element of gross negligence requires proving that the plaintiff has suffered damage because the defendant has breached his duty to the plaintiff. In the rock climbing situation, the actor would have to prove that he suffered an injury due to the faulty equipment provided by the instructor. Since the actress broke both of her legs due to faulty equipment, she would have been able to establish this element.
The final element of gross negligence is the causal link. The plaintiff must prove that his injury was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s conduct. In the case of the rock climbing injury, the cause would be present if the instructor provided the plaintiff with equipment that the instructor knew was defective. It is to be expected that faulty equipment could lead to equipment failure and injury to a climber. Consequently, the instructor and the adventure company would be liable to the plaintiff for his damages.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
