In tort law, how does a person's voluntary assumption of risk impact their claims for negligence?

In tort law, the doctrine of assumption of risk plays a significant role when evaluating a plaintiff's claim for negligence. When a person voluntarily assumes a known risk, it can completely bar recovery for any injuries sustained that are related to that risk. This principle is grounded in the idea that individuals should be held responsible for their choices, particularly when they are aware of the risks involved in an activity.

If someone voluntarily participates in an activity where risk is evident and inherent—such as playing a contact sport or participating in a dangerous hobby—they are effectively acknowledging and accepting those risks. As a result, if they suffer injuries arising from those accepted risks, they typically cannot pursue a negligence claim against another party. This outcome is due to the legal principle that the participant has waived their right to hold others accountable for damages stemming from risks they willingly took on.

This doctrine is distinct from defenses like comparative negligence, which attributes some degree of fault to both parties, but does not provide a complete bar to recovery. Likewise, it differs from notions of reducing potential damages, as assumption of risk can nullify recovery altogether rather than just limit damages. In cases where assumption of risk is successfully shown, it serves as a complete defense, leading to a complete negation of liability for the