Glossary
Joint and Several Liability
By LiabilityGap EditorialUpdated 1 min read
The short answer
Joint and several liability means that when two or more defendants caused the same injury, the plaintiff can collect up to 100% of the judgment from any one of them, regardless of that defendant's share of fault. It's why the defendant with insurance, home equity, or income — not necessarily the one most at fault — usually ends up paying the bulk of the award.
Joint and several liability means that when two or more defendants are responsible for the same injury, the plaintiff can collect up to 100% of the judgment from any one of them — regardless of that defendant's share of fault. A defendant found 10% at fault can be made to pay the entire award; their remedy is to seek contribution from the co-defendants for the other 90%. Negligence legislation in most common-law provinces works this way, with some variations — in British Columbia, for instance, liability commonly becomes divided (several only) where the plaintiff was partly at fault themselves.
The logic is plaintiff protection: the injured person shouldn't be under-compensated just because one wrongdoer is uninsured or insolvent. The practical effect is something else — the deep-pockets rule. The right to chase co-defendants for contribution is worth exactly what those co-defendants have, which is often nothing.
Why it matters to you#
Joint and several liability is why your share of fault and your share of the bill can be wildly different numbers. If you're the defendant with an insurance policy, home equity, or a salary — and the driver who was 90% at fault has none of those — you are where the plaintiff's lawyer collects. Plaintiff lawyers working on contingency fees screen cases for collectability, so defendants with visible assets get pursued hardest. This is one of the strongest structural arguments for umbrella or excess liability coverage: it protects against not just your own worst mistake, but the full cost of a shared accident where you're the only one worth suing.
In practice#
- You're 15% at fault for a crash; the mostly-at-fault driver carries the provincial minimum and owns nothing. The catastrophically injured plaintiff enforces the multi-million-dollar balance against you.
- Host and bar both found liable after a drunk-driving injury: the plaintiff can collect the whole judgment from whichever has coverage.
- Your contribution claim against a broke co-defendant is legally valid and financially worthless.
Frequently asked questions
What is joint and several liability?
Joint and several liability means that when two or more defendants are responsible for the same injury, the plaintiff can collect up to 100% of the judgment from any one of them, regardless of that defendant's share of fault. The paying defendant is left to chase the others for their contributions.
Can I be forced to pay a whole judgment if I was only partly at fault?
In most Canadian provinces, yes. Negligence legislation commonly makes at-fault defendants jointly and severally liable, so a defendant found 10% at fault can be made to pay the full award if the other defendants are uninsured or broke — with only a right of contribution against them.
Why is joint and several liability called the deep-pockets rule?
Because plaintiffs collect from whoever can actually pay. The defendant with insurance, home equity, or income ends up covering the shares of co-defendants who have nothing — so having visible assets or higher policy limits makes you the natural collection target.
Sources
- Negligence Act, RSBC 1996, c 333 — Government of British Columbia
How exposed are you? Most people have no idea.
10 questions. 2 minutes. No email needed to see your score.
Check my lawsuit exposure