Yadavi Kiran, LLB, New Law College, BVP, Pune
ABSTRACT
Strict Liability refers to a party's liability that is imposed without a finding of fault. The plaintiff is expected to show that the tort has taken place due to a part played by the defendant. Situations that are considered intergroup are subject to Strict Liability under the law. It deters irresponsible behaviour and unnecessary legislation by requiring potential defendants to take all reasonable precautions. Even though he was not careless in maintaining the material on his premises, the person from whom the goods fled will be held liable. The culpability is imposed not because he was negligent but because the substance was kept somewhere it wasn't supposed to be kept. The notion of Strict Liability was established as a result of this judicial decision. In the case of Ryland v. Fletcher2, it was decided that the defendant was accountable not because of carelessness but because he had harmful material on his remises. Strict Liability sans exclusions is what Absolute Liability is. In the case of MC Mehta v. Union of India3, the notion of absolute liability was developed. According to the rule of Absolute Liability, if a person is involved in any action and any injury is caused to another person as a result of that conducive to engaging in that activity will be held accountable. Liability exception would not be considered. Absolute Liability differs from Strict Liability in this manner. A person accountable under Liability can claim the exceptions set forth under Strict Liability, whereas Absolute Liability has no exceptions.
Keywords: Strict Liability, case Ryland v. Fletcher, Absolute Liability, case MC Mehta v. Union of India.
