n. automatic responsibility (without having to prove negligence) for damages due to possession and/or use of equipment, materials or possessions which are inherently dangerous, such as explosives, wild animals, poisonous snakes or assault weapons. This is analogous to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur in which control, ownership and damages are suf...
Found on
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.xhtml?selected=2029
In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his acts and omissions regardless of culpability (including fault in criminal law terms, typically the presence of mens rea). Strict liab...
Found on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability
[criminal] In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which mens rea (Latin for `guilty mind`) does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the actus reus (Latin for `guilty act`) although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offence. The liability is ...
Found on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal)
(from the article `negligence`) ...kitchen matches. In certain critical fields—e.g., the milk industry—the law imposes liability for any mistakes, even when the strictest ... ...prosecution to establish the defendant`s intent, or even recklessness, would render such regulatory legislation largely ineffective and ... ...the ...
Found on
http://www.britannica.com/eb/a-z/s/172
Liability for an occurrence which does not require proof of mens rea only the actus reus needs be shown. The burden of proof rests with the defendant.
Found on
http://www.encyclo.co.uk/local/20474
Where the defendant is held liable if the plaintiff suffers damage without the plaintiff having to show the defendant was at fault/negligent.
Found on
http://www.encyclo.co.uk/local/20921
(n) 'Strict liability' is defined as the liability which falls on the person by virtue of possessing any dangerous articles and caused by such articles whether by negligence or not by the person possessing such articles. It gives an implied liability on the person to take all precautions. For example if somebody carries gunpowder, some on thrown a ...
Found on
http://www.encyclo.co.uk/local/21213
Doctrine that holds defendants liable for harm caused by their actions regardless of their intentions or lack of negligence. Often applied to manufacturers or sellers of defective products in products liability cases.
Found on
http://www.encyclo.co.uk/local/21681
a crime where someone is guilty whether they were intending to do it or not - e.g., driving a car with bald tyres
Found on
http://www.encyclo.co.uk/visitor-contributions.php
Liability even when there is no proof of negligence. Often applicable in product liability cases against manufacturers, who are legally responsible for injuries caused by defects in their products, even if they were not negligent.
Found on
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s080.htm
Automatic responsibility for damages due to manufacture or use of equipment or materials that are inherently dangerous, such as explosives, animals, poisonous snakes, or assault weapons. A person injured by such equipment or materials does not have to prove the manufacturer or operator was negligent in order to recover money damages.
Found on
http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/strict-liability-term.html
No exact match found.
