May 13, · Strict liability is a standard of liability in which the defendant is legally. responsible if he/she undertakes a voluntary act causing a prohibited. result or state of affairs without having to prove fault or criminal intent. The main Jan 14, · Topics: Criminal law / Pages: 5 ( words) / Published: Jan 14th, Strict Liability. “The law presumes that mens rea is always required in criminal offences, unless it is clear that Parliament intended an offence to be one of strict liability”. Discuss. (25marks) The general principle of criminal law is that the prosecution must establish the presence of both Feb 25, · Order custom essay Strict Liability with free plagiarism report GET ORIGINAL PAPER Further more, with there being no actual or effective means on protection against strict liability or accidents, leaves a broad range of exceptional blameworthiness
Strict Liability - blogger.com
Home Essay Samples Law Tort Law Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law. This essay seeks to explain on the principle of strict liability as explained in the law of tort. It will also show the elements that are needed to subside with the latter principle. Not only that but also to give a full explanation on the case of Rylands strict liability essay Fletcher with respect to the mentioned principle. Decided precedents will be given in order to justify and give more meaning to the principle of strict liability. In civil law, a tort is an intentional; or rather an act of negligence, which causes strict liability essay to another person.
A tort is the basis for a civil lawsuit which includes acts such as assault, negligence, products liability and intentional infliction of emotional distress. However, there may be certain situations where someone can be held liable for some cause even though his or her actions were not negligent. This is called strict liability, also known as liability without fault or absolute liability though there are possible defences to this kind of tort. The Oxford Strict liability essay Dictionary has defined strict liability as liability for a wrong that is imposed without the claimant having to prove that the defendant was at fault[footnoteRef:2].
It can also be defined as a legal doctrine that holds a party liable for their actions or products, without the plaintiff having to prove negligence or any fault[footnoteRef:4]. All these definitions sum up to one point which is that a person can be held liable even if there acts or omissions strict liability essay not amount to negligence. Such a situation is illustrated in the case of Alphacell Ltd v Woodward where the defendants had been charged with causing pollution to a river which was contrary to s2 of the Rivers Prevention of Pollution Act However, The House of Lords held the defendants were liable. Lord Salmon stated:. As a result, many rivers which are now filthy would become filthier still and many rivers which are now clean would lose their cleanliness, strict liability essay.
The legislature no doubt recognised that as a matter of public policy this would be most unfortunate. The law only imputes strict liability to situations it considers to be dangerous by nature. This principle was brought about in the case of Rylands v Fletcher. In the case of Rylands v Fletcherstrict liability essay, Rylands, a mill owner, had paid some independent contractors to make a reservoir on strict liability essay piece of land, which was intended to supply water to the mill. In the course of the construction, the contractors discovered the shafts and passages of an old coal mine on the land, strict liability essay, some of which joined up with a mine situated on neighbouring land, belonging to the claimant.
The defendant himself was not negligent, since there was no way he could have known about the shafts, and nor could he be held vicariously liable for the contractors, strict liability essay, who were clearly not his employees for that purpose, strict liability essay. An action for trespass was unavailable, simply because the damage was not direct and immediate, and at the time of the case the tort of nuisance could not be applied to an isolated escape. Nevertheless, the House of Lords held that the defendant was liable in tort. Lord Blackburn J defined the rule as:, strict liability essay.
This meant that it does not matter if you are negligent or not, as long as something dangerous you own escapes and injures someone, you will be held liable. Generally, for a claimant to succeed in a case of strict liability, strict liability essay, they must prove the following elements at all costs:. The thing that the occupant brings forth to their land must be likely to cause serious damage if, at all, it escapes, even though it might be strict liability essay safe if it is not allowed to escape. In other words, it can be said that ownership of something dangerous is enough to hold you liable or responsible if at all it escapes.
Examples of dangerous thing includes Ultra hazardous activities such as the use of highly volatile chemicals and highly explosive substanceskeeping of wild animals such as lion, tigers…etc. and making products that are defective. In the case of Hale v Jennings where the defendant had operated a chair-o-plane roundabout at a funfair. One of the chairs from it broke loose and hit the plaintiff. According to the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, this was held to amount to an escape. The defendant was held liable for injury sustained by the plaintiff. This simply means that if something dangerous escapes, of which it cannot be explained scientifically, the occupant may strict liability essay be held liable.
Someone cannot be held strictly liable if the cause of injury was of a natural cause. This simply means that a defendant will not be held liable for damage caused by the escape of water which is naturally present on the land, nor for trees or plants which grow naturally. Such a situation is shown in the case of Giles v Walkerthe defendant had ploughed up forest land, with the result that a large crop of thistles grew there. The seeds from these blew onto neighbouring land, causing the same problem on that land. The defendant was held not liable under Rylands v Fletcher because thistles grew naturally, and had not been introduced by him, strict liability essay. If the dangerous thing does not escape to the claimants land, then they cannot succeed under strict liability.
A shell that was being manufactured there exploded in the course of her employment, thereby injuring her, and because there was no suggestion that the defendants had been negligent. She claimed under Rylands v Fletcher. It was held that escape, for the purposes of applying the proposition in Rylands v Fletcher, according to Lord Simon, strict liability essay, means:. Just like every strict liability essay, there should be proof of injury or damage in order to successfully claim for damages. So the escape of a dangerous thing must be proved to have been the cause of the strict liability essay or injury, strict liability essay. There must not be a novus actus interveniens. However, strict liability essay, it is not in all cases where someone can succeed even though they suffer damage.
Some Courts give dissenting views on who can actually sue. There is dicta that strict liability essay that occupation is an essential condition, strict liability essay. The strict liability essay, an auctioneer, sued under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher for the loss he made which was as a result of the cattle being infected. However, the claim failed because the House of Lords held that pure economic loss was not recoverable under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. All in one, strict liability is a liability imposed on a person for a wrong that is imposed without the claimant having to prove that the defendant was at fault. This doctrine was formulated in the case of Rylands v Fletcher where it was held that a person who, for his own purposes, brings on his land and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, strict liability essay, must do so at his peril, and, if he does not do so, he is prima facie answerable for all damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.
For someone to be held liable for this tort, there must be a dangerous thing, an accumulation of a non-natural use of a dangerous thing Giles v Walker and an escape of the dangerous thing from the defendant to the claimant as explained in Reads v Lyons. We will occasionally send you account related emails. Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law Category. Civil LawTort Law. Download for Free. Watch out! This text is available online and is used for guidance and inspiration. Get Custom Essay. We will write a unique paper on this topic for you!
You can receive your plagiarism free paper paper on any topic in 3 hours! Learn more, strict liability essay. Cite this Essay To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below. Copy to Clipboard. APA MLA Harvard Vancouver Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law. Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law. Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law [Internet]. Related Topics. Finished papers: Customer reviews: Hire Me. Related essays Tort Law: Cases Of Law Work. Tort Law In Ambiguous Goods Field. Purpose of Tort Law: Bangladesh Prospective. Approach of Courts Towards Torts in Public Law. Employee Safety And Protection In Ngos And Civil Society Groups. Humanitarian Intervention in Civil Law and International Law.
The Civil Law of Indian Legal Framework. Definiton of Civil Rights as an Strict liability essay Citizen. Jurisprudence and Different Legal System Throughout Legal History. Scottish Civil Law Structure and Legal Personnel. The Key Elements Of Tne Advocacy Letter. The Dark Web: Fighting Cybercrime. Need writing help? Still looking strict liability essay a perfect essay? We have. Get Free Estimation. Absolutely Confidential. Money Back Guarantee. Type in your email and receive this essay in a second. Enter a valid e-mail address Send Essay. Uh-Oh, Copying is Forbidden, strict liability essay.
Your sample was successfully sent. You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic Proceed to Order. Thank you!
What is a strict liability crime?
, time: 2:37Analysis Of The Strict Liability In Tort Law | Essay Sample, words:
Introduction Strict liability crimes occur when one voluntarily causes the prohibited result or stateof affairs, without the need to prove that the defendant had any mens reaDefendants charged with SL Offences could plead common law defences such asduress, necessity, and This essay seeks to explain on the principle of strict liability as explained in the law of tort. It will also show the elements that are needed to subside with the latter principle. Not only that but also to give a full explanation on the case of Rylands v Fletcher with respect to the mentioned principle. Decided precedents will be given in order to justify and give more meaning to the Strict liability offenses make it a crime simply to do something, even if the offender has no intention of violating the law or causing the resulting harm. Strict liability is based philosophically on the presumption that causing harm is in itself blameworthy regardless of the actor’s intent (Schmalleger, Hall & Dolatowski, ).Estimated Reading Time: 8 mins
No comments:
Post a Comment