Pari delicto
In legal terms, pari delicto, which is a legal term interpreted to mean equal fault, is used in cases where two people or two parties are equally guilty for a crime (Constantini 1). In the case of contract law, no individual can claim breach of contract if both were equally at fault for the breach of the contract. In the case of accidents, no party can collect damages if both parties were equally to blame for the accident. The only way one party can collect damages is if he proves that the other was more at fault in relation to the rule of comparative negligence. Pari delicto is often used in civil lawsuits where both parties involved are equally to blame for the offence committed. In such cases, the court chooses not to side with either party and if the lawsuit is related to possession of something, the one in possession of the contended object retains its ownership (Constantini 1).
An example where pari delicto was used was on 28th July, 2015 where the United States court in New York dismissed the case between Peterson vs. McGladrey (Schweitzer 1). The Trustees had filed a complaint against McGlardey on grounds that their negligence in conducting audits made them incapable of identifying a ponzi scheme that resulted to the loss of over 1.5billion dollars (Schweitzer 1). The defendants however the defendants were not held accountable as the doctrines of the pari delicto policy excluded of any responsibility since the fund’s wrongdoing could have precluded the claims made by the trustees had McGladrey been culpable. Since both the plaintiff and the defendant were equally to blame, the court resulted to settle the Peterson vs. McGladrey under pari delicto.
Work cited
Constantini J, “The in pari delicto defense in an accountant’s liability action: A changing dynamic” American Bar Association, 2017
Schweitzer m, “7th Circ. Empowers in pari delicto defense bankruptcy” 2017, retrieved from, https://www.law360.com/articles/683859/7th-circ-empowers-in-pari-delicto-defense-in- bankruptcy
