strict liability


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

strict liability

The liability of a property owner or occupier for injury to others despite the lack of any fault or wrongdoing by the owner or occupier.Typically, when people engage in an inherently dangerous activity on land,such as blasting rock,they are responsible for damage to adjoining property or to persons injured by the blast.This is true even if an independent contractor was responsible for the work and even if everything was done exactly as it should have been done using all possible safeguards and protections and the injury was the result of a freak accident.

References in periodicals archive ?
The promotion of strict liability would also force the Ibrox club to confront their own dark issues, almost exclusively a sectarian songbook that continues to drag its reputation down.
It wasn't long before strict liability for product defects came under attack by proposals to replace it with a risk/ benefit test.
From this perspective, the adoption of a regime of strict liability is justified in cases in which the demand for product safety is highly homogeneous and frequent.
When all consumers suffer the same harm and perceive risk accurately, all of the liability rules are efficient, but when consumers misperceive risk, only strict liability remains efficient.
But what if committing a strict liability offense could land
But it's the claim of strict liability that is the giant's biggest prize.
We know strict liability works because what tends to happen is the clubs have to do something about it.
Part III sets out the economics of products liability law; first analyzing the effects of a simple strict liability rule, and then looking at the effects of the actual legal tests.
80) More recently, however, strict liability has been slightly curtailed, with courts interpreting a strict proximate-cause requirement into rescue-recovery statutes.
This new middle category of strict liability allows the courts to protect the public from harm without the harsh punishment of absolute liability on one hand and without burdening the Crown to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt that accused intended to commit the offence.
It then offers an explanation for this outcome--a substantial failure of the MPC-inspired revision of criminal codes--that emphasizes the continuing normative appeal of strict liability, the influence of instrumental rationales for punishment, and the limits of the judicial role in an era in which the legislative and executive branches are vastly expanding the reach and severity of criminal punishment.