STRICT LIABILITY : WHEN FAULT DOES NOT MATTER
AUTHOR – SOHENI MUKHERJEE, STUDENT AT IILM GURUGRAM
BEST CITATION – SOHENI MUKHERJEE, STRICT LIABILITY : WHEN FAULT DOES NOT MATTER, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 1343-1348, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.
ABSTRACT
Strict liability is a doctrine of law that makes a person liable for damages or harm brought about by his actions, whether through intent or negligence. Strict liability is generally useful in cases of dangerous activities, defective products, and damage to the environment. Unlike liability based on negligence, strict liability always holds a defendant liable even if he used reasonable care. The reasoning behind this doctrine is the allocated risk , those who are involved in immensely risky activities or producing potentially dangerous products ought to be held accountable for any ensuing harm. Landmark judgements given in cases like Rylands v. Fletcher (1868)[1] and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)[2] demonstrates its operation, undermeaning the principle that certain risks cannot be passed on to innocent parties. This research paper revolves around and discusses the introduction and history of strict liability, its applicability in contemporary jurisprudence , through real life examples as our important landmark cases globally , in the end it overall examines criticisms of the doctrine , and evaluates its role in emerging legal challenges.
[1] Jus Corpus Law Journal , Ryland vs Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330.
[2] Supreme Court of India , MC Mehta & Anr. vs Union of India & Ors (1986)