strict liability


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

strict liability

Forensic medicine Liability without fault–eg, when one is responsible for all of the consequences of the actions of one's employees regardless of whether a result was intended or not. See Liability.

strict liability

Liability attributed to a manufacturer or seller of a dangerous or defective product regardless of proven negligence or fault.
See also: liability

strict liability,

n a case in which responsibility for breaking the law is enforced without proving intent, or
mens rea. In civil law, a case in which negligence does not have to be proven in order to be found legally liable.
References in periodicals archive ?
The court rejected that argument, holding "the better rule is to apply the strict liability test to all manufactured products without distinction as to whether the defect was caused by the design or the manufacturing.
The two preceding arguments are consistent with the actual trend among several jurisdictions to adopt strict liability regimes in the area of product safety.
6) First, when consumers accurately perceive the risk of product failure, all three of the basic liability rules--no liability, strict liability, and negligence--yield the efficient outcome.
18) Strict liability offenses, however, come from a different mold.
It's possible that a decision in this case could set precedent, making future claims for strict liability against Monsanto nearly impossible to sustain, and the ruling would most likely be the result of CFS's lack of proof.
33) Under strict liability, the price of the risky product would reflect its level of risk, so that consumers would shift their purchases from risky products toward comparatively safe products.
89) The government requires the owner to abide by a hybrid standard of care between strict liability and negligence.
These offences may properly be called offences of strict liability.
In R v Wholesale Travel Group Inc, (2) rendered under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, (3) the Court was asked to determine whether this reversal of the burden of proof for strict liability offences was not merely fair, but constitutional as well.
4) MPC policy, in other words, rejected strict liability (5) for any element of a crime, which resulted in liability being imposed more proportionately to an actor's moral fault than was true in the common-law tradition.
45) From this perspective, a system of no liability generates the same incentives to take care and to adjust activity levels as a system of fault-based or strict liability employers' liability would.
Tort law, by contrast, combines principles of strict liability with