STRICT LIABILITY

ROUGH DRAFT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE COURSE

TITLED JURISPRUDENCE-I FOR OBTAINING THE DEGREE B.B.A., LL.B.
DURING THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2020-21.

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -

Dr. Manoranjan kumar Akash Anand
Faculty of Jurisprudence-2 6th Semester
Roll No: 1808

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA

February, 2020
INTRODUCTION
When pursuing a legal action for liability, the plaintiff must generally prove that the
defendant was somehow at fault, whether by negligence or direct fault, for the damages
incurred by the plaintiff. The law, however, recognizes there are certain circumstances that
are so inherently dangerous or hazardous, that there is no need for the plaintiff to prove direct
fault or negligence.

Strict liability, also referred to as “absolute liability,” applies to such issues as injuries or
other damages caused by a defective product, damages caused by animals, and engaging in
certain hazardous activities. An individual or entity may be held strictly liable in both civil
and criminal actions.

In civil law, a tort is an intentional or negligent act, a civil wrong, as opposed to a criminal
act, which causes harm to another. A tort, then, is the basis for a civil lawsuit, and includes
such acts as negligence, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and products
liability.

A strict liability tort holds a person or entity responsible for unintended consequences of his
actions. In other words, some circumstances or activities are known to be fundamentally
dangerous, so when something goes wrong, the perpetrator is held legally responsible.

For example: ABC Construction company is building a road through a rural area when it
encounters a rocky promontory. Although the area is rather close to a housing district, they
decide to blast away the rock. A child, playing in a yard two blocks away is hit by a piece of
flying rock, causing a deep laceration. ABC Construction was just going about its business,
and took the usual precautions for such blasting, so negligence isn’t an issue.

The activity of blasting, however, carries with it inherent dangers, including flying debris.
The child’s parents may sue the construction company for the child’s medical bills, as well as
his pain and suffering, as ABC Construction is strictly liable in the situation.

METHOD RESEARCH

The researcher has adopted a purely doctrinal method of research. The researcher has made
extensive use of the library at the Chanakya National Law University and also the internet
sources.
SOURCE OF DATA

The researcher has relied upon both primary as well as secondary sources to complete the
project.
• Primary Source – Bare Act, Case Law

• Secondary Source – Newspaper, Article Internet

METHOD OF WRITING

The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

The researcher tends to analyze the necessity of absolute liability in India, know the
exception under strict liability and examine the difference between absolute and strict
liability.

HYPOTHESIS

The researcher presumes that this rule is very important for commercial and other activities
that have the potential to result in horrific damages.

TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION

Chapter 1: - introduction.

Chapter 2: - Development and types of strict liability

Chapter 3: - Rylands vs Fletcher case study

Chapter 4: - Strict liability vs Absolute liability

Chapter 5: - Liability and defences

Chapter 6:- Conclusion and Suggestion