Court case[1991] 1 QB 24

The plaintiff, aged eighteen, was a pillion passenger on a motorcycle driven by Hunt, aged sixteen. The plaintiff knew that Hunt had no licence and no insurance. They had spent the evening drinking together at a disco. On the way home the plaintiff encouraged Hunt to ride fast and recklessly, weaving about the road so as to frighten other road users. The motorcycle collided with an oncoming car; Hunt was killed and the plaintiff seriously injured. The plaintiff sued Hunt's personal representative (and the car driver, who was found not negligent).

The Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiff's appeal. The plaintiff and Hunt were engaged in a joint illegal enterprise, the reckless and dangerous driving of the motorcycle, and the plaintiff's injuries arose directly out of it; on grounds of public policy (ex turpi causa non oritur actio), and because the circumstances made it impossible to determine the standard of care owed by one participant to the other, the plaintiff could not recover. The defence of volenti was excluded by s. 148(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1972. The Court also held that the trial judge was wrong to assess the plaintiff's contributory negligence at 100 per cent: the 1945 Act presupposes that the damage is partly the defendant's fault, so the reduction cannot be total.