Consent as a term of jurisprudence is a possible excuse against civil or criminal liability. Defendants who use this defense are arguing that they should not be held liable for a tort or a crime, since the actions in question were taken with the plaintiff or "victim's" consent and permission.

For example, if the plaintiff signs a document stating that he or she is aware of the hazards of paintball, and that individual is then injured playing the game, the express consent given in advance may excuse the person who shot the plaintiff. In English law, the principle of volenti non fit injuria applies not only to participants in sport, but also to spectators and to any others who willingly engage in activities where there is a risk of injury.

The question of consent is important in medical law. For example, a surgeon may be liable in trespass f they do not obtain consent for a procedure. There are excemptions, such as when the patient is unable to give consent.

Also, a surgeon must explain the significant risks of a procedure. This was explored in Australia in Rogers v Whitaker 175 CLR 479. If a surgeon does not explain a material risk that subsequently eventuates, then that is considered negligent. These material risks include the loss of chance of a better result if a more experienced surgeon had performed the procedure.

Metrics are a system of parameters or ways of quantitative and periodic assessment of a process that is to be measured, along with the procedures to carry out such measurement and the procedures for the interpretation of the assessment in the light of previous or comparable assessments. Metrics are usually specialized by the subject area, in which case they are valid only within a certain domain and cannot be directly benchmarked or interpreted outside it.