Which of the following is a defense for liability?

• A. Res ipsa loquitur
• B. Vicarious liability
• C. Contributory negligence
• D. Negligence per se

Answer: (C)

Contributory negligence is a defense because it argues that the plaintiff’s own careless actions helped cause the harm, so the defendant’s liability is reduced or even eliminated. The idea is that accountability isn’t one-sided: if the injured person itself failed to exercise reasonable care, that fault should lessen or bar recovery, depending on the rules of the jurisdiction. For example, in a sports setting, if an athlete ignores safety protocols or disregards a posted warning and injuries result, the defense can point to that conduct to limit liability.

Res ipsa loquitur, by contrast, is not a defense. It’s a doctrine used to infer negligence from the nature of the accident itself and shift the burden to the defendant to prove they were not negligent. Vicarious liability isn’t a defense either; it describes a situation where one party is held responsible for another’s actions (like an employer liable for an employee), not a way to defend against liability. Negligence per se is evidence of negligence arising from violation of a statute, not a defense to liability.