strict liability and absolute liability
Strict liability and absolute liability are two legal concepts that impose liability on a person or entity for harm caused to another party. While both concepts share some similarities, there are also some key differences between them. Here are the step-by-step explanations of strict liability and absolute liability:
Strict Liability:
Strict liability is a legal concept that imposes liability on a person or entity for harm caused to another party, regardless of fault.
In strict liability, the plaintiff does not need to prove that the defendant was negligent or intended to cause harm.
The defendant is liable simply because they engaged in a certain activity or product that caused harm to the plaintiff.
Strict liability is commonly applied in cases involving dangerous activities or products, such as hazardous materials, explosives, or wild animals.
The burden of proof in strict liability cases is typically lower for the plaintiff, as they only need to prove that harm was caused, and not necessarily that the defendant was at fault.
Absolute Liability:
Absolute liability is a legal concept that imposes liability on a person or entity for harm caused to another party, regardless of fault or intent.
In absolute liability, the plaintiff does not need to prove that the defendant was at fault, negligent, or intended to cause harm.
The defendant is liable simply because they engaged in a certain activity or product that caused harm to the plaintiff, and the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the activity or product.
Absolute liability is commonly applied in cases involving hazardous or ultra-hazardous activities, such as nuclear power or the transport of dangerous goods.
The burden of proof in absolute liability cases is typically high for the plaintiff, as they need to prove that the harm was caused by the defendant’s activity or product and that the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the activity or product.
In conclusion, both strict liability and absolute liability impose liability on a person or entity for harm caused to another party, but the key difference between them is the level of fault or intent required to establish liability. In strict liability, the defendant is liable for harm caused regardless of fault, while in absolute liability, the defendant is liable for harm caused even if they had no intent or fault, but the harm was a foreseeable consequence of their activity or product.