header-logo header-logo

Bad cause no action

04 September 2009 / Kenneth Warner
Issue: 7383 / Categories: Features , Profession , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Kenneth Warner examines the ex turpi causa non oritur actio principle

The principle “ex turpi causa non oritur actio” (from a bad cause no action arises) may be raised as a defence to an action in tort in a situation where the plaintiff’s harm arises out of the course of his own criminal actions.
The principle may find to condone its origin in Everet v Williams [1725] 68 LJQB 549, in which a highwayman apparently filed a Bill in Equity for an account against his partner in crime.

It is clear on the case-law that the defence is restricted to the context of serious criminal wrongdoing. In a case of a relatively minor offence, ex turpi causa, finds no proper place. In current law the principle is often articulated as expressing a strong sentiment of public policy, and while in a negligence action such failures as those described above may bring about a reduction of damages for contributory negligence, they are not viewed as justifying defeat of the plaintiff’s action entirely, where the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll