STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY
written by-shalini Bishi
Liabilities means when a person legally responsible for wrongful act committed by that person or other person authorized by him, that may be with Intentions or without Intentions.
Their are 3 type of Liabilities in law of torts
STRICT LIABILITY
When a person have the possession of any dangerous things and that dangerous object escape from his possession to other premises and causing Harm to the others is called strict liabilities. Here Intention is not necessary.
Ryland v. Fletcher
Defendant constructed a reservoir through independent contractor, during the excavation of the ground. There were some unblock passages and through the passages water Escape from defendant's reservoir to the plaintiff's coal mine And it cause damage to the plaintiff. defendant liable for the damage in the scope of strict liability.
ESSENTIAL OF STRICT LIABILITIES
EXCEPTION
1- PLAINTIFF 'S OWN FAULT
if there is own fault of plantiffs, then dependent will not be liable.
PONTING V. NOAKS
The plaintiff's horse intrupted into defendant Premises. And died due to nibbing of leaf of poisonous tree. The court held that the defendant was not liable because the plaintiff himself being at fault.
2- Act of God
essential - use of natural force
event of extraordinary
NIchols v. Marsland
The defendant constructed an artificial lake. Due to heavy rainfall, the bridge of plaintiff was destroyed. Defendant take the defence of act of God.
3 - consent of the plaintiff
plaintiff Give the concent to the defendant to accumulate the dangerous thing.
4- act of third party
5- statutory authority
Absolute liabilities
There are some exception of strict liabilities due to which some wrong doer exclude from purview liability. So the court introduced a new concept called absolute liability.
Absolute liabilities means a liability from which a person can not escape from his liability for the damage caused and liable Absolutely.
M. C Mehta v. Union of India
Leakage of Olympic gas on fourth and 6th December 1985 from one of the unit of Shri Ram, food and fertilizer industry, Delhi. Due to this leakage, several person had died. An action was brought against the industries through PIL.
the judges refused to follow the strict liability and came up with the doctrine of absolute liability. The court directed the organisation who has filed the petition of files against the industry in appropriate court with 2 months to demand compensation and behalf of aggrrived victims.
Union carbide corporation v. Union of India (Bhopal gas tregedy)
In 2nd and 3rd December 1948 leakage of methyl isocynide poisonous gas from Union carbide company in Bhopal. Over 3000 people lost their lives. The government of India Enacted the Bhopal gas disaster at 1985, the court applying the principle of absolute liability and held that the company liable and give order to pay compensation to the victim.
.jpeg)
.png)
.jpeg)
