Smith v. Baker

Facts

• The plaintiff worked in a quarry where a crane regularly swung stones over his working area
• He was aware of this ongoing risk and had continued working despite it
• He had no genuine practical alternative to continuing this employment given his economic circumstances
• A stone fell from the crane and injured him

Issue

1. Whether an employee's continued work with knowledge of an ongoing workplace hazard constitutes voluntary consent (volenti) to that risk, barring a negligence claim.

Held

• Mere knowledge of a risk (scienti) is not the same as voluntary consent to bear that risk (volenti)
• The plaintiff's continued work reflected economic necessity and absence of genuine alternative, not free acceptance of the risk
• The employer remained liable for negligence in maintaining this hazard
• Volenti requires genuine, free choice to accept the specific risk, not merely continued exposure under compulsion

Ratio Decidendi

Volenti non fit injuria requires both knowledge of a risk and genuine, voluntary acceptance of it. Continued exposure to a known risk, where the plaintiff has no real practical alternative (particularly in employment relationships involving economic dependency), does not satisfy the voluntariness element the defence requires.