Strict Liability

Strict liability

Certain areas of activity in which liability is imposed even though there was no intent to cause harm and all due care was used

Trespassing animals

Generally: liability for harm caused by certain animals

1. Sheep, pigs, cattle, horses, goats, fowl

2. Not dogs or cats

Non-domesticated animals

Strict liability for wild animals not native to area

Exception: wild animals in state of nature on property

Vicious animals

Majority rule: if an owner has actual or contructive knowledge that a domestic animal has vicious propensities, and the animal harms someone, strict liability

Vicious = dangerous to people in some way

Abnormally dangerous activities

Those whose risks are so unusual as to justify the imposition of strict liability

Blasting is archetypal

Restatement Section 519 - Abnormally Dangerous Activities

One who carries on an abnormally dangerous activity is subject to liability for harm resulting from the activity, even if he has exercised the utmost care to prevent harm

Restatement Section 520

Abnormally dangerous factors

1. Existence of a high degree of risk of some harm to the person, land, or chattels of others 

2. Likelihood that the harm will be great

3. Inability to eliminate the risk by the exercise of reasonable care 

4. Extent to which the activity is not a matter of common usage 

5. inappropriateness of the activity to the place where it is carried out

6. extent to which its value to the community is outweight by its dangerous attributes 

Activities commonly held to be abnormally dangerous (but not always)

1. Blasting 

2. Transportation and storage of toxic chemicals and flammables 

3. Pile driving 

4. Crop dusting 

5. Fumigation 

6. Rocket testing 

7. Fireworks displays 

8. Oil drilling 

9. Hazardous waste 

Limitations on strict liability

1. Harm within the risk

2. Force majeure

3. Acts by third parties

4. Assumption of risk

Harm within the risk

Strict liability should be limited to the consequences which lie within the extraordinary risk which makes an activity abnormally dangerous 

E.g. what makes blasting abnormally dangerous is flying debris or the direct effects of vibrations and shockwaves. Therefore, harm must be caused by these 

Force majeure

Strict liability does not apply for injury resulting from acts of God which the owner had no reason to anticipate 

Acts by third parties 

The act of a third party over whom a defendant has no control does not give rise to liability even where defendant’s activtity is subject to strict liability 

E.g. malicious third person plugs D’s sink and causes flood in apartment below 

Assumption of the risk

1. Can be a defense for strict liability 

2. Subjective test for vicious animals 

   1. P cannot recover if he knew the animal was vicious and incited the animal or put himself in the way of the animal 

Rylands v. Fletcher

Strict liability for non-natural uses of land which cause dangerous things to emanate and damage another’s property

Fencing in and fencing out statutes

1. Fencing out: if plaintiff properly fences land and animals break in, owner of animals strictly liable

2. Fencing in: Owner of animals must fence in or restrain them, strictly liable if failure to do so

3. Exception: animals straying onto another’s land while being driven on the road