In which case can a plaintiff NOT recover damages for negligence?

A plaintiff cannot recover damages for negligence if there is no duty owed to them by the defendant. In tort law, particularly in negligence claims, the fundamental element that must be established is the existence of a duty of care. This duty is the legal obligation that requires individuals to adhere to a standard of reasonable care while performing acts that could foreseeably harm others.

If a plaintiff cannot demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty of care, then there can be no breach of that duty, nor can there be any resultant damages from a breach. This principle stems from the need for a legal relationship between the parties, which justifies holding one party accountable for the actions that lead to the plaintiff's injury. Thus, the absence of a duty means the negligence claim cannot succeed.

In contrast, other options reference scenarios that don’t necessarily eliminate a plaintiff's ability to recover damages. For instance, having insurance coverage does not negate a plaintiff's right to seek compensation for losses due to another's negligence. Proof of due diligence by the defendant could potentially serve as a defense to negate negligence, but it doesn’t preclude the possibility of a claim. Similarly, a witness testifying against the plaintiff doesn’t remove the foundation for a negligence claim unless it directly undermines the