When we speak of “joint and several liability”, it means that each natural person or party bears the same responsibility and is responsible for all measures (as set out in their agreement and the nature of their transactions) relevant to the obligations identified. For example, if a bank lends $100,000 to two people jointly and individually, both people are also responsible for ensuring that the full amount of the loan is returned to the bank. If the loan defaults, the bank may choose to continue repaying the entire outstanding balance. A joint and several liability action could be brought on behalf of workers who became ill after working in multiple workplaces where they were exposed to harmful materials. For example, they could be construction workers suffering from physical illnesses due to contact with a toxic substance contained in the materials used in all their workplaces. The term joint and several is often used in the securities industry in subscription contracts for a new issue of bonds or shares. In such cases, the company that agrees to sell a portion of the total offer is responsible for that agreed portion plus a corresponding portion of all unsold securities. For example, suppose A, B, and C negligently violate V. V successfully sues A, B and C for $1,000,000. If the court applies a system of joint and several liability, V could require A V to pay the full $1,000,000. A, they could require a contribution from B and C. However, if B or C could not pay, A would have to pay the full $1,000,000.

As mentioned above, joint and several liability tends to benefit the plaintiff because it increases the chances that all damages awarded can be recovered. Contractual and joint liability means that one or more parties jointly undertake to share certain responsibilities and/or to share the same liability separately. The legal term can be confusing; However, the term is used to clarify the responsibility that each person shares in a contract. The term essentially describes that each party named in the legally binding document or agreement is required to perform the conditions, actions and obligations set out in the agreement. n. in divorce proceedings, a court decision (often with parental consent) that the parents share custody of a child. There are two types of custody, physical and legal. Joint physical custody (rather than having one parent have custody and the other has visits) does not mean an exact allocation of time with each parent, but can be based on a reasonable amount of time with each parent, either explicitly set (specific days, weeks, holidays, alternating periods) or based on established policies and shared payment of the cost of raising the child.

Joint custody means that both parents can make decisions for the child, including medical treatment, but if possible, they should consult with the other. In the event of the death or disability of one of the parents, custody passes to the remaining parent, giving the working parent the only opportunity to act as the parent for the child without further court order. The main effect of this is a psychological benefit for both parents and the child, so a child can be informed that both parents took care of the child, even if the child had to live with one of them most of the time. Comparative fault is sometimes referred to as “pure multiple liability”. It is more common in the United States than joint and several liability. For example, a subscriber who has jointly and severally agreed to be liable for the sale of a 30% interest in a new issue must sell 30% of the remaining unsold portion. Each union member is responsible for all remaining shares in proportion to the size of each share. Joint and Multiple is a legal term used to describe a partnership or other group of persons in which each named person bears equal responsibility. In a legally binding document, the term clarifies jointly and severally the responsibility shared by each party. In essence, it states that all such persons are required to take all measures required under the agreement. The issue of joint and several liability is often at issue in “toxic tort” claims, such as asbestos-related mesothelioma. Indeed, mesothelioma can be caused by asbestos exposure, but often workers who have been exposed to asbestos have been exposed in several workplaces on several construction sites, and it is therefore difficult to choose a single pesticide responsible for the resulting mesothelioma.

In Ford Motor v. Boomer (2003), the Court considered the issue of reduced liability and concluded that when two aggrieved parties are responsible for an incident (i.e., Two negligent drivers were involved in a car accident), but the court cannot determine which injured party is responsible and to what extent, the court can then reduce the liability of both injured parties or one of them. Most U.S. states limit the use of shared and multiple responsibilities or use a hybrid approach. If a bank lends $100,000 to two people jointly and severally, both may have to repay the full amount owing in the event of default.