As in any other legal cases, there can be a lot of technicalities and legal defenses in a personal injury case as well. Like all cases, these cases too are difficult to resolve, especially if you are working on your own. Alternatively, if you take help of an experienced and established Personal Injury Lawyer in Mississauga you will find that these cases are easier to resolve. This is because the attorney will have a lot of similar cases like yours resolved before successfully. Therefore, he or she will be knowledgeable about the common defenses that may be raised by the opponent party and prepare a counter measure beforehand.

Variance of defenses

Basically, the defenses raised by the opponent may vary from one case to another even if the type of accident happens to be the same. Therefore, there is no ‘one size fits all’ concept practiced and followed by the Personal Injury Lawyer in Mississauga while dealing with such cases. There are lots of reasons for the defenses to vary. It may be due to the requirements of the specific type of lawsuit filed or for the rules and codes based on which that lawsuit is filed. The injury lawyer has to prepare different arguments for different defenses.

The role of the injured

The role of the plaintiff is the most common defense encountered by an Injury Lawyer in Mississauga. In most of the times the defense attorney or the insurance company claims that the plaintiff himself or herself is responsible for the accident. They claim either he or she was not careful and attentive or had no reason to be at the place of the accident in the first place. However, such defenses mainly depend on two factors. First, the role of the plaintiff in the accident and the second factor is based on the actions or inactions of the plaintiff. This includes not seeking medical attention or not filing the lawsuit on time.

Based on negligence

In most of the cases, the Injury Lawyer in Mississauga emphasizes on the contributory negligence factor to ascertain the fault of the defendant. However, at times they may also consider the comparative negligence factor. This is what the opponent party will harp more than the plaintiff. As per comparative negligence rule, the amount of compensation will be reduced according to the degree or percentage of involvement of the injured person up to fifty percent or less than that.

Assumption of risk

Assumption of risk is another common type of defense raised in a personal injury claim case. In such situations the defendant may put forward arguments like the injured person already knew about the risks and dangers before taking part in an activity the triggered the accident. However, it is required to prove in such cases that the type of injury suffered by the plaintiff has a very close relation with the inherent risks of the activity.Your winning chances depend on the arguments that the injury lawyer puts up and how well your attorney counters it. For more information visit here: MPC Personal Injury Lawyer