Strict liability
Encyclopedia : S : ST : STR : Strict liability
|
| Tort law II |
|---|
| Part of the common law series |
| Negligent torts |
| Negligence · Negligent hiring |
| Negligent entrustment |
| Negligent infliction of emotional distress |
| Doctrines affecting liability |
| Duty of care · Standard of care |
| Proximate cause · Res ipsa loquitur |
| Calculus of negligence · Eggshell skull |
| Vicarious liability · Attractive nuisance doctrine>Attractive nuisance |
| Rescue doctrine · Duty to rescue |
| Comparative responsibility |
| Duties owed to visitors to property |
| Trespassers · Licensees · Invitees |
| Defenses to negligence |
| Contributory negligence |
| Comparative negligence |
| Assumption of risk · Intervening cause |
| Strict liability |
| Ultrahazardous activity |
| Products liability |
| Nuisance |
| Other areas of the common law |
| Contract law · Property law |
| Wills and trusts |
| Criminal law · Evidence |
Tort law
The plaintiff needs only to prove that the tort happened and that the defendant was responsible. Neither good faith nor the fact that the defendant took all possible precautions are valid defenses. Strict liability often applies to those engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous ventures.Strict liability is sometimes called absolute liability to distinguish those situations where, although the plaintiff does not have to prove fault, the defendant can raise a defense of absence of fault.
A classic example of strict liability is the owner of a tiger rehabilitation center; no matter how strong the tiger cages are, if an animal escapes and causes damage and injury, the owner is held liable. Another example is a contractor hiring a demolition subcontractor that lacks proper insurance. If the subcontractor makes a mistake, the contractor is strictly liable for any damage that occurs.
The law imputes strict liability to situations it considers to be inherently dangerous. It discourages reckless behavior and needless loss by forcing potential defendants to take every possible precaution. It also has the effect of simplifying litigation and allowing the victim to become whole more quickly.
The doctrine's most famous advocates were Learned Hand, Benjamin Cardozo, and Roger J. Traynor.
In English and Welsh law, where tortious liability is strict, the defendant will often only be liable for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his or her act or omission (as in nuisance).
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.