NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

LAW OF TORTS

SYNOPSIS

TOPIC: STRICT LIABILITY

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MRS. KAVITA SINGH ROHIT CHAKRABORTY
 INTRODUCTION
Strict Liability is a tort which can be categorized under “no-fault torts” as it does not require
any negligence from the part of the defendant. It can also be classified under “non-intentional
torts” as intention of the defendant to cause harm to the other person is irrelevant. The
principle of Strict Liability was laid down in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher for the first time.
To constitute the tort of Strict Liability, the following elements and conditions should
be present and satisfied:
1. Bringing or accumulation of some dangerous substance, which may cause
mischief in case it escapes, on the defendant/respondent’s land.

2. Escape of such dangerous substance.

3. Non-natural use of defendant’s land.

However, the principle of Strict Liability has been edited and overruled in India, and it has
been replaced by a new principle named “Doctrine of Absolute Liability” which was laid
down in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India.

OBJECTIVES
This project aims to:
o Provide a deeper understanding of the definition and elements of the tort of Strict
Liability.
o Understand the definitions of “dangerous substance” and “non-natural use of land”.
o Know the exceptions to the tort of Strict Liability.
o Discuss some landmark cases based on this specific tort.
o Discuss and distinguish between the principles of Strict Liability and Absolute
Liability.

METHOD OF STUDY
The research methodology used in making this project is “DOCTRINAL”.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Law of Torts, Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, 27th Edition, 2016: “If a person who, for his
own purpose, brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if
it escapes, must keep it in at his peril; and if he does not do so is prima facie answerable for
all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.” – Principle laid down by
Blackburn J. in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher.

Dr. R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts including Compensation under Motor Vehicles Act and
Consumer Protection Laws, 2016: “If an industry or enterprise is engaged in some
inherently dangerous activity from which it is deriving commercial gain and that activity is
capable of causing catastrophic damage then the industry officials are absolutely liable to pay
compensation to the aggrieved parties.” – The principle of Absolute Liability laid down in the
case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India.
Furthermore, the following clauses were added by the court which, in essence, form the
major distinction between the two torts.
“The industry cannot plead that all safety measures were taken care of by them and that there
was negligence on their part. They will not be allowed any exceptions neither can they take
up any defence like that of ‘Act of God’ or ‘Act of Stranger’.”

CONTENT

1. Introduction
2. Elements of Strict Liability.
3. Explanation of the elements of Strict Liability.
4. Case laws related to each element.
5. Exceptions to the tort of Strict Liability.
6. Doctrine of Absolute Liability.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY