Opinion ID: 1486394
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Principle of Fairness in Whitehead and Kales

Text: Determining whether Union Carbide (appellant) may secure noncontractual indemnity from Chemlime (respondent) on account of injuries sustained by Chemlime's employee Parks requires examination of the breadth and scope of Whitehead and Kales and a reexamination of Maryland Heights. Throughout the opinion in Whitehead and Kales , reliance is placed on what is called the principle of fairness. For example: The long history of the law of joint and concurrent tortfeasor liability in our jurisprudence is in fact a rich expositional refinement of the principle of fairness. [566 S.W.2d at 468-69; emphasis added.] Indemnity is theoretically tied to the principle of fairness. [ Id. at 469; emphasis added.] Using the analogy of an old time-worn building, we have added and re-constructed so much of our law of joint and concurrent tortfeasor liability, the origins of which are ancient, that it has lost its architectural integrity and its structural balance. Only the foundationthe principle of fairness remains undisturbed and sturdy. We have therefore determined that, steadfastly consistent with the dictates of our common law tradition and the principles of equity embedded therein, we are obligated to reconstruct upon the principle of fairness a law of joint and concurrent tortfeasor liability which is secure, predictable, and effective. [ Id. at 472; emphasis added.] The principle of fairness imbedded within our law compels this adoption of a system for the distribution of joint tort liability on the basis of relative fault. [ Id. at 474; emphasis added.] The interests of plaintiffs are secure; the interests of joint or concurrent tortfeasors will now be clothed in a rule based upon realism and fairness between them. [ Id. at 474-75; emphasis added.] The principles of equity and fairness on which the adoption of relative fault in Whitehead and Kales is based are very broad principles. The doctrine of relative fault must be equally broad in scope. In order to determine the breadth of the equitable principles underlying the adoption of relative fault, those principles must be given some content. The principle of fairness is stated in Whitehead and Kales as follows: [I]n exchange for the opportunity of some undertaking, we each promise all others that we will be liable for the damage which our own negligence in the undertaking has caused. 566 S.W.2d at 469 n. 4. [1] The Court stated that it is this principle which is the basis of or the premise for our fault-based system of tort liability. The equitable principle which prompted the adoption of the system of relative fault is simply that one is liable for the damage which he has negligently caused.