Can a defendant rely on the defence of ex turpi causa?

In Hall v. Hebert, supra, the plaintiff suffered injuries in a car accident which occurred when he was driving the defendant’s souped-up muscled car. The defendant was a passenger in the car when the accident occurred. The plaintiff brought a negligence action against the defendant. The trial judge found that both parties were criminally impaired at the time that the defendant permitted the plaintiff to drive and held that the defendant could not rely on the defence of ex turpi causa since the parties had not been engaged jointly in criminal behaviour relating to the operation of the car. On appeal, the court held the defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio applied in these circumstances to deny the plaintiff relief. The court held that the principle underlying ex turpi causa is not limited to circumstances where the injuries are sustained during the course of a joint criminal enterprise.