Eggshell skull

Eggshell Skull

An illustration of an eggshell skull

The term "eggshell skull" refers to a legal doctrine that holds a defendant liable for the full extent of a plaintiff's injuries, even if the plaintiff's pre-existing condition or vulnerability makes them more susceptible to harm. This doctrine is based on the principle that a defendant must take their victim as they find them, regardless of any pre-existing conditions or vulnerabilities.

Origins

The concept of the eggshell skull rule originated in common law jurisdictions, particularly in the field of tort law. The name "eggshell skull" is derived from the analogy that if a person has an unusually fragile skull like that of an eggshell, and someone negligently causes harm to them, the defendant cannot escape liability by arguing that the harm would not have occurred to a person with a normal skull.

Application

The eggshell skull rule is often applied in personal injury cases, where the plaintiff's pre-existing condition or vulnerability is exacerbated by the defendant's negligent actions. For example, if a person with a pre-existing back injury is involved in a car accident and suffers further damage to their back, the defendant would be held responsible for the full extent of the plaintiff's injuries, even if a person without a pre-existing condition would have suffered less harm.

Legal Implications

The eggshell skull rule places a burden on defendants to take into account the individual characteristics and vulnerabilities of their victims. It ensures that defendants are held accountable for the harm they cause, regardless of the victim's pre-existing conditions. This rule is based on the principle of fairness and prevents defendants from escaping liability by arguing that the harm would not have occurred to a person without pre-existing vulnerabilities.

Criticisms

While the eggshell skull rule is generally seen as a fair and just principle, it has faced some criticisms. Critics argue that it places an unfair burden on defendants, as they may be held liable for harm that would not have occurred to a person without pre-existing vulnerabilities. Additionally, some argue that it can lead to inflated damages awards, as plaintiffs with pre-existing conditions may be awarded compensation for harm that would have been less severe in a person without such conditions.

Conclusion

The eggshell skull rule is an important legal doctrine that ensures defendants are held responsible for the full extent of a plaintiff's injuries, regardless of any pre-existing conditions or vulnerabilities. While it has faced criticisms, it is generally seen as a fair and just principle that promotes accountability and fairness in the legal system.

See Also

• Tort law
• Personal injury
• Negligence
• Damages