Yahoo India Web Search

Search results

  1. Dictionary
    res ipsa loquitur
    /ˌreɪz ˌɪpsə ˈlɒkwɪtə/

    noun

    • 1. the principle that the mere occurrence of some types of accident is sufficient to imply negligence.

    More definitions, origin and scrabble points

  2. Oct 12, 2015 · The Latin term res ipsa loquitur translates to “the thing speaks for itself,” and is used in the U.S. legal system to refer to a doctrine of law in which an individual is assumed to have been negligent because he had exclusive control over the incident that caused the injury or damages.

  3. Res ipsa loquitur (Latin: "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine in common law and Roman-Dutch law jurisdictions under which a court can infer negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved in the context of tort litigation.

  4. : a doctrine or rule of evidence in tort law that permits an inference or presumption that a defendant was negligent in an accident injuring the plaintiff on the basis of circumstantial evidence if the accident was of a kind that does not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence.

  5. Dec 19, 2023 · Res Ipsa Loquitur is a legal doctrine that allows the presumption of negligence in a case where the nature of an accident or injury implies it was likely caused by someone’s negligence, even without direct evidence of the defendant’s actions.

  6. Feb 3, 2023 · Res ipsa loquitur is Latin and literally means the thing speaks for itself. In the context of a legal claim based on negligence, res ipsa loquitur essentially means that the circumstances...

  7. Res ipsa loquitur is a principle in tort law that allows plaintiffs to meet their burden of proof with what is, in effect, circumstantial evidence .

  8. Jan 9, 2021 · Res Ipsa Loquitor is a Latin maxim meaning ‘The Thing Speaks for Itself'. It is a Doctrine in the Anglo-American Common law that says that in a law suit, a court can infer negligence from the very nature of the accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on whether or not the defendant was at fault, keeping in view his actions.