I think I should, as I am bound to do, explain to the House what this Bill proposes to do. This Bill is designed to achieve a measure of law reform in this country which I think has long been overdue. Deputies are possibly aware that, from time to time in our courts, when an injured person seeks damages in respect of his injury because of the negligence of some other person, such a person is met, under our law, or can be met by the defence of contributory negligence.
Under the law as it stands, while the negligence of the person who injures another gives a cause of action, the contributory negligence of the injured person affords a complete defence. I do not want to hold up the House by any dissertation on the law. I am not fit to do it and it is no purpose of the House to entertain such dissertation but, I should just like to exemplify, if I may, a type of case which frequently occurs in our courts. A man may be working on a scaffolding built around some building in the course of construction. That scaffolding may not be very carefully erected nor may the per son working upon the scaffolding be as zealous about his own safety as perhaps he might be. Working high above the ground he may put a foot wrong. As a result he may fall a considerable distance to the ground and sustain very serious injuries.
Under the law as it stands at the moment, when such a person comes to court to claim damages because his employer was careless in the scaffolding he had erected, he is met with the defence that, even though the employer may have been 98 or 99 per cent. at fault, merely because this unfortunate man in some slight degree contributed to the occurrence he is entitled to no damages whatsoever. That is a state of law which applies only in this part of the country. It does not apply in Northern Ireland or in England. Other countries decided many years ago to modify the defence of contributory negligence by providing that in a case such as that which I instance the court is entitled to reduce the damages by the amount by which the injured party contributed to the occurrence.
The object and purpose of this Bill is to provide for the amendment of the common law of this country in this respect and to introduce into our common law what already applies elsewhere, namely, that this old defence of contributory negligence be modified in such a way that the court or jury trying the case shall be entitled to reduce the damages by the amount by which or to the extent to which the injured party contributed to the occurrence. I think it will ensure in a great number of cases that the person who is badly injured through the fault of another shall not be disentitled to any damages merely because to some degree, be it greater or be it lesser, he had contributed to the occurrence.
That is the purpose of this Bill and it is a view I have long held and expressed in this House. I introduced a similar Bill seven years ago and it is pertinent to recall that, in 1952, following a similar statement, the then Minister agreed with and subscribed to the view I expressed and assured me across the House that he proposed to do something about it. The discussion on the Bill was postponed in the sense in which this Minister spoke and it never arose for discussion again. The Government changed and a new Government came into office, of which I was a member. Arrangements were made to introduce a legislative proposal to this House incorporating this proposal. Unfortunately, before that could be introduced, the Government again changed and now, seven years later, I am again proposing the same type of amendment.
The Minister said the other day that the Government had a Bill. The Government had a Bill seven years ago and I do not know why it has not been introduced. Certainly, if the Minister says to me tonight, following what I have said here now, that a Government Bill will be introduced next week or in a month's time or two months' time, I am perfectly content to withdraw this motion for the First Reading of this Bill, provided—and I know if the Minister says, it it will be done—that on the records of this House, it will appear that this important measure of law reform is being approached in a realistic sense.
