Strict liability
Encyclopedia
In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability
(including fault in criminal law
terms, typically the presence of mens rea
). Strict liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability
), corporations law
, and criminal law
. For analysis of the pros and cons of strict liability as applied to product liability, the most important strict liability regime, see product liability
.
A classic example of strict liability is the owner of a tiger
rehabilitation center. No matter how strong the tiger cages are, if an animal escapes and causes damage and injury, the owner is held liable. Another example is a contractor hiring a demolition
subcontractor that lacks proper insurance
. If the subcontractor makes a mistake, the contractor is strictly liable for any damage that occurs.
In strict liability situations, although the plaintiff does not have to prove fault, the defendant can raise a defense of absence of fault, especially in cases of product liability
, where the defense may argue that the defect was the result of the plaintiffs actions and not of the product, that is, no inference of defect should be drawn solely because an accident occurs. If the plaintiff can prove that the defendant knew about the defect before the damages occurred, additional punitive damages can be awarded to the victim.
The doctrine's most famous advocates were Learned Hand
, Benjamin Cardozo, and Roger J. Traynor
.
Under English and Welsh law, in cases where tortious liability is strict, the defendant will often be liable only for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his or her act or omission (as in nuisance
).
Strict liability is sometimes distinguished from absolute liability
. In this context, an actus reus may be excused from strict liability if due diligence
is proved. Absolute liability, however, requires only an actus reus
.
Strict Liability can be determined by looking at the intent of the legislature. If the legislature seems to have purposefully left out a mental state element(mens rea) because they felt mental state need not be proven, it is treated as a strict liability. However, when a statute is silent as to the mental state(mens rea) and it is not clear that the legislature purposely left it out, the ordinary presumption is that a mental state is required for criminal liability. When no mens rea is specified, under the Model Penal Code or MPC, the default mens rea requirement is recklessness, which the MPC defines as," when a person consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to a material element"
Strict liability laws can also prevent defendants from raising diminished mental capacity defenses - since intent does not need to be proven.
Culpability
Culpability descends from the Latin concept of fault . The concept of culpability is intimately tied up with notions of agency, freedom and free will...
(including fault in criminal law
Criminal law
Criminal law, is the body of law that relates to crime. It might be defined as the body of rules that defines conduct that is not allowed because it is held to threaten, harm or endanger the safety and welfare of people, and that sets out the punishment to be imposed on people who do not obey...
terms, typically the presence of mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
). Strict liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability
Product liability
Product liability is the area of law in which manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers, and others who make products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause...
), corporations law
Corporations law
Companies law is the field of law concerning companies and other business organizations. This includes corporations, partnerships and other associations which usually carry on some form of economic or charitable activity. The most prominent kind of company, usually referred to as a "corporation",...
, and criminal law
Criminal law
Criminal law, is the body of law that relates to crime. It might be defined as the body of rules that defines conduct that is not allowed because it is held to threaten, harm or endanger the safety and welfare of people, and that sets out the punishment to be imposed on people who do not obey...
. For analysis of the pros and cons of strict liability as applied to product liability, the most important strict liability regime, see product liability
Product liability
Product liability is the area of law in which manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers, and others who make products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause...
.
Tort law
In tort law, strict liability is the imposition of liability on a party without a finding of fault (such as negligence or tortious intent). The claimant need only prove that the tort occurred and that the defendant was responsible. The law imputes strict liability to situations it considers to be inherently dangerous. It discourages reckless behavior and needless loss by forcing potential defendants to take every possible precaution. It also has the effect of simplifying and thereby expediting court decisions in these cases.A classic example of strict liability is the owner of a tiger
Tiger
The tiger is the largest cat species, reaching a total body length of up to and weighing up to . Their most recognizable feature is a pattern of dark vertical stripes on reddish-orange fur with lighter underparts...
rehabilitation center. No matter how strong the tiger cages are, if an animal escapes and causes damage and injury, the owner is held liable. Another example is a contractor hiring a demolition
Demolition
Demolition is the tearing-down of buildings and other structures, the opposite of construction. Demolition contrasts with deconstruction, which involves taking a building apart while carefully preserving valuable elements for re-use....
subcontractor that lacks proper insurance
Insurance
In law and economics, insurance is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss. Insurance is defined as the equitable transfer of the risk of a loss, from one entity to another, in exchange for payment. An insurer is a company selling the...
. If the subcontractor makes a mistake, the contractor is strictly liable for any damage that occurs.
In strict liability situations, although the plaintiff does not have to prove fault, the defendant can raise a defense of absence of fault, especially in cases of product liability
Product liability
Product liability is the area of law in which manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers, and others who make products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause...
, where the defense may argue that the defect was the result of the plaintiffs actions and not of the product, that is, no inference of defect should be drawn solely because an accident occurs. If the plaintiff can prove that the defendant knew about the defect before the damages occurred, additional punitive damages can be awarded to the victim.
The doctrine's most famous advocates were Learned Hand
Learned Hand
Billings Learned Hand was a United States judge and judicial philosopher. He served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and later the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...
, Benjamin Cardozo, and Roger J. Traynor
Roger J. Traynor
Roger John Traynor served as the 23rd Chief Justice of California from 1964 to 1970, and as an Associate Justice from 1940 to 1964...
.
Under English and Welsh law, in cases where tortious liability is strict, the defendant will often be liable only for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his or her act or omission (as in nuisance
Nuisance
Nuisance is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F...
).
Strict liability is sometimes distinguished from absolute liability
Absolute liability
Absolute liability is a standard of legal liability found in tort and criminal law of various legal jurisdictions.To be convicted of an ordinary crime, in certain jurisdictions, a person must not only have committed a criminal action, but also have had a deliberate intention or guilty mind...
. In this context, an actus reus may be excused from strict liability if due diligence
Due diligence
"Due diligence" is a term used for a number of concepts involving either an investigation of a business or person prior to signing a contract, or an act with a certain standard of care. It can be a legal obligation, but the term will more commonly apply to voluntary investigations...
is proved. Absolute liability, however, requires only an actus reus
Actus reus
Actus reus, sometimes called the external element or the objective element of a crime, is the Latin term for the "guilty act" which, when proved beyond a reasonable doubt in combination with the mens rea, "guilty mind", produces criminal liability in the common law-based criminal law jurisdictions...
.
Criminal law
The concept of strict liability is also found in criminal law, though the same or similar concept may appear in contexts where the term itself is not used. Strict liability often applies to vehicular traffic offenses. In a speeding case, for example, whether the defendant knew that the posted speed limit was being exceeded is irrelevant. The prosecutor would need to prove only that the defendant was operating the vehicle in excess of the speed limit.Strict Liability can be determined by looking at the intent of the legislature. If the legislature seems to have purposefully left out a mental state element(mens rea) because they felt mental state need not be proven, it is treated as a strict liability. However, when a statute is silent as to the mental state(mens rea) and it is not clear that the legislature purposely left it out, the ordinary presumption is that a mental state is required for criminal liability. When no mens rea is specified, under the Model Penal Code or MPC, the default mens rea requirement is recklessness, which the MPC defines as," when a person consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to a material element"
Strict liability laws can also prevent defendants from raising diminished mental capacity defenses - since intent does not need to be proven.
See also
- Command responsibilityCommand responsibilityCommand responsibility, sometimes referred to as the Yamashita standard or the Medina standard, and also known as superior responsibility, is the doctrine of hierarchical accountability in cases of war crimes....
- Vicarious liabilityVicarious liabilityVicarious liability is a form of strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency – respondeat superior – the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate, or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability...
- Public liabilityPublic liabilityPublic liability is part of the law of tort which focuses on civil wrongs. An applicant usually sues the respondent under common law based on negligence and/or damages...
- Due Care