Section 37(3) of the Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA) does not relieve a defendant of the burden of proving that the plaintiff consciously adverted to the possibility that the known risk might eventuate and decided to proceed regardless; it is a protection for the plaintiff against the statutory presumption of awareness in s 37(1). The 'exceptional case' exception to the C.A.L principle requires a level of intoxication amounting to complete incapacity for rational judgment, not merely impaired judgment or repeated errors of judgment. A hotel proprietor that repeatedly warns an intoxicated patron, ceases alcohol service, and attempts ejection has exercised reasonable care even if the patron subsequently injures herself.
The full text is available to signed-in members.