Absolute Liability Case Study

738 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Strict liability and negligence

The word absolute liability means liability without fault. The word ‘absolute’ indicates liability in all the circumstances and therefore there should not be any exception. The term ‘absolute liability’ signifies ‘complete’ or ‘unconditional’ liability without any exception. ‘Absolute liability’ is much stronger than strict liability laid down in Ryland v. fletcher. In the rule of Ryland v. fletcher there were exceptions as there are no exceptions in absolute liability as there are no exceptions in absolute liability the defendant has no chance to escape as in the case of strict liability. In India, the supreme court of India laid down the rule of absolute liability in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India [AIR 1987 SC 1086]. …show more content…

There are situations when a person may be liable for some harm even though he is not negligent in causing the same or there is no intention to cause the harm the law recognizes such as no fault liability since In such a case the liability arises even without any negligence or fault on the part of the defendant, it is known as the rule of absolute …show more content…

According to this rule if a person brings on his land and keeps there any dangerous thing that is the thing which is likely to do mischief if it escapes he will be prima facie answerable for the damage caused by its escape even tough if he had not been negligent in keeping it there the liability arises not because there was any fault or negligence on the part of the person but he has kept some dangerous thing on his land and the same has escaped from there and caused damaged , Absolute liability is kind of liability somewhat peculiar in that a person becomes liable without being there any fault on his part the wrong arises from the breach of an absolute duty absolute duties is defined as a duty which renders a man liable without any fault of his and irrespective of any consideration of intention or negligence on his part it is absolute that means it is not necessary for the injured party to prove any intention or negligence on the part of the injuring party and no amount of care and caution expended by the latter to prevent the damage done to the former will excuse

Show More
Related

  • Perin V. Hayne Case Summary

    1160 Words  | 3 Pages

    “In tort law, the doctrine which holds a defendant guilty of negligence without an actual showing that he or she was negligent. Its use is limited in theory to cases in which the cause of the plaintiff's injury was entirely under the control of the defendant, and the injury presumably could have been caused only by negligence”(Burt, M.A., & Skarin, G.D. (2011). In consideration of this, the defendant argues that the second foundation of this principle should be solely based on common knowledge of the situation. Although, there is a experts testimony tartar is no basis in this case , in the experts testimony or anything else, for indicating that the plaintiffs injury resulted from the negligence of the defendant. The court correctly found the defendant not liable under the Res ipsa

    Read More

  • Mamo V Surace Case Study

    1105 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was found in the respondents submissions that a duty of care was necessary. The issue of negligence he believed was unsustainable as the risks were minimal and it was not unusual to take one’s eyes off the road. Causation was not satisfied as the judge concluded that the respondent would not have had enough time in any circumstance to avoid a collision with the cow.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Negligence

    887 Words  | 2 Pages

    A series of events unfolded when George, running late for class, parked his car on a steep section on Arbutus drive and failed to remember to set the parking brake. The outcome of not remembering to set the parking brake caused many issues resulting in scrapping a Prius, breaking through fencing, people on the train sustaining injuries, and finally a truck that jack-knifed and caused a 42-car pileup. Could the parties that were injured, from George’s actions, be recovered from under the negligence theory? To understand if George is negligent, it is best to look at the legal issue, the required elements of negligence, the definition and explanation of each element of the case, and finally to draw a conclusion to determine if George is negligent.

    Read More

  • Mamo V Surace Case Summary

    1300 Words  | 3 Pages

    The refinement of this definition has significant legal implications, as it broadens the scope of those who can sue within blameless accidents. Prior to this, such victims would also face being labelled with “fault”. Supporting the findings of Axiak, by establishing non-tortious conduct as separate from “fault”, similar, future cases are more likely to proceed despite the plaintiff’s contributory

    Read More

  • John Doe V. Avalon East School Board (2004)

    747 Words  | 2 Pages

    Vicarious liability is a common law concept that refers to the liability that arises when one party, such as an employer, is legally liable for the acts or omissions of another party, such as an employee. This is because employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees and those of others who come into contact with them and their business.

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Essay

    1096 Words  | 3 Pages

    Proximate Cause: The shoulder and rotator cuff injuries were within the scope of the risks that made us determine that the dropping of Vicky’s body was a breach. Because Dwayne dropped Vicky, Dwayne’s dropping of Vicky’s body proximately caused the injuries sustained. Felix’s carrying of the body was a cause in fact but not the proximate cause of the injuries Vicky

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.

    Read More

  • Negligent Misstatement Case Study

    1471 Words  | 3 Pages

    The liability for negligent misstatement may arise from pure economic loss. According to Steele (2010), ‘Economic losses will be regarded as “pure” if they do not flow from any personal injury to the claimant nor from physical damage to his or her property’. The boundaries between “pure” economic loss and the loss which is “consequential” from damage were established by the Court

    Read More

  • Premise Liability Case

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    When you or your loved one walks into a business or is invited onto private property , you expect to be walking into a safe environment. Business are responsible for taking certain measures to ensure the safety of you and your loved one. If you become injured because of a property owner 's failure to keep their property free from hazards, hidden or known, you may have a legal claim against the property owner. This is a premise liability case. Below are some frequently asked questions and answers regarding premise liability claims.

    Read More

  • Subjective Definition of Recklessness

    1384 Words  | 3 Pages

    The establishment of the Subjective definition of recklessness was through the case of Cunningham. In R v Cunningham D broke a gas metre to steal money contained within the metre, leading to a gas leak which caused D’s mother in law to become seriously ill. The subjective definition was developed here as D had been reckless as he had realised there was a risk of gas escaping and endangering someone, and went ahead with his action anyway. Therefore, demonstrating the subjective definition that a defendant to be guilty under Cunningham recklessness they must ...

    Read More

  • Negligence In The Donoghue Vs. Stevenson's Case

    874 Words  | 2 Pages

    Law of Torts is a civil wrong and is an unreasonable interference with the interests of others. Law of Torts provides protection against harmful conduct, it attempts to provide an impartial set of rules for resolving private disputes over claims of improper interference with individual rights. A common denominator of each Law of Tort is a failure on the defendant’s part to exercise the level of care that the law deems due to the plaintiff, and the normal remedy for this is unliquidated damages. Negligence is one of these Torts, it is an independent tort as it is an element for other torts. Negligence is causing loss by failure to take reasonable care when there is a duty to do so. To succeed in an action for negligence the plaintiff must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care to avoid

    Read More

  • The Tort of Negligence

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    did owe a duty of care to Mrs. Donoghue, in that it was up to them to...

    Read More

  • Tort Of Negligence Essay

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this case, the defendant was held to be not liable for negligence because any other reasonable race track operator would have acted in the same way. Similarly, in Glasgow Corporation v Muir, the defendant was held to be not liable for negligence because he had acted as a reasonable person would have by allowing the claimants entry into his tea room when the weather was bad

    Read More

  • The English Law on Vicarious Liability

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    The English Law on Vicarious Liability An employer is responsible for damage caused by the torts of his employees acting in the course of employment. This is known as ‘vicarious liability’[1]. Essentially, vicarious liability is where the employer is generally substituted in terms of liability for the employee, the employee also has liability but the resources of the employer such as insurance makes them more financially attractive to the claimant. The mechanism of vicarious liability is arguably the best compromise between the needs of tort victims and the freedom of businesses as the employer usually has insurance to cover the tort of the employee, making it more financially viable to the employer than directly compensating the claimant.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Strict Liability Rule in Dog Bite Cases

    873 Words  | 2 Pages

    Strict liability arises in the animal context when the animal at issue is either a wild animal or a domestic animal with a known vicious propensity. This principle is the origin of the well-known “one bite” rule for dogs. Strict liability, sometimes called absolute liability, is the legal responsibility for damages, or injury, even if the person found strictly liable was not at fault or negligent. Under a rule of strict liability, proof of causation is a necessary condition for liability. The early common law distinguished between wild and domesticated animals for purposes of imposing liability on their owners. Owners of fierce or wild animals were absolutely liable for harm caused to others. However, owners of domesticated animals, such as dogs, were liable only if they had scienter; that is, the owners were liable only if they knew of the animal’s dangerous or mischievous propensities. Tort law has traditionally sought to balance the “usefulness” of an animal with the risk it represents to the public. Common law torts is a legal structure that seek to allocate risk among the members of society; the more valuable a particular activity to society, the more willing is the society, through its legal rules, to shift risk of the activity to others.

    Read More

More about Absolute Liability Case Study

Open Document