strict liability

Under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher (House of Lords, 1868), a person who brings onto his land and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes is liable for the damage caused by its escape, even without negligence, provided the use of land was non-natural. Defences include act of God, act of a stranger, the plaintiff's own default, consent, and statutory authority.

In India, the Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta (oleum gas leak, 1986) went further and laid down absolute liability for enterprises engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities: no exceptions apply, and compensation is proportional to the size and capacity of the enterprise. Students must distinguish the two.

Example

The reservoir owner was liable under strict liability when the water escaped and flooded the neighbour's mine, though he was not negligent.

In Indian law

• Rylands v. Fletcher (House of Lords, 1868)
• M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1986 INSC 281: absolute liability for hazardous industries, without the Rylands exceptions

See also

absolute liability · act of God · no-fault liability · vis major

Read more in the study notes

• Crime: meaning, elements and stages (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)
• General exceptions: mistake, accident, necessity and incapacity (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)
• Bailment (Contract II)
• Absolute liability, polluter pays and the precautionary principle (Environmental Law)
• Common law and criminal law remedies for environmental harm (Environmental Law)
• Compensation jurisprudence: public law damages for violation of fundamental rights (Indian Constitutional Law - New Challenges)