Law of Torts: Negligence, Strict and Absolute Liability
This domain tests the elements of tortious liability, the standard of care, strict and absolute liability, vicarious liability and defences.
Essentials
Duty recognised by law, breach, damage where damage is the gist, and causation not too remote. Injuria sine damno: a legal wrong without measurable loss is still actionable (trespass). Damnum sine injuria: loss without violation of a legal right (ordinary competition) gives no action.
Negligence
Duty (Donoghue v Stevenson neighbour principle), breach measured against the reasonable person, causation and damage. Res ipsa loquitur shifts the evidential burden where the accident is of a kind that does not occur without negligence, the instrument was in the defendant's exclusive control, and the plaintiff did not contribute.
Strict and absolute liability
Rylands v Fletcher: escape of a dangerous thing from a non-natural use of land creates liability without proof of negligence, subject to defences - act of God, act of a stranger, statutory authority, consent. M.C. Mehta v Union of India imposes absolute liability on enterprises engaged in hazardous activity, with no exceptions, and compensation may be awarded under Article 32.
Vicarious liability and defences
A master is liable for a servant's acts in the course of employment; independent contractors are generally outside this. Defences: volenti non fit injuria, contributory negligence (apportionment), act of God, statutory authority, necessity, private defence.
Worked example
A hospital oxygen cylinder bursts in the operation theatre and injures a patient who never handled it. Res ipsa applies; the hospital must explain the cause, and failure to do so fixes liability.
Traps
Volenti requires free consent to the risk, not mere knowledge of it; contributory negligence reduces rather than defeats the claim; strict liability under Rylands is not the same as absolute liability, which admits no exceptions.