12. Absolute Liability

Meaning and Definition

• The doctrine of absolute liability is a legal principle under the Law of Tort which holds a person or enterprise liable for damages caused by hazardous or inherently dangerous activities irrespective of fault, negligence, or intent.
• Unlike strict liability which allows certain defenses, absolute liability admits no exceptions or defenses.
• The liable party must compensate for the harm caused regardless of precautions taken or the absence of negligence.
• This doctrine aims to protect the public from reckless, dangerous enterprises by imposing unconditional liability on them.
• The term "absolute" signifies complete and unconditional responsibility for harm caused.

Origin and Evolution

• The doctrine of absolute liability has its roots in the earlier concept of strict liability, notably in the English case of Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), where a person who brings a hazardous object onto their land is liable if it escapes and causes damage.
• However, the strict liability rule did allow certain exceptions (e.g., acts of God).
• In India, the Supreme Court evolved this concept into absolute liability notably through the landmark case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case, 1987), following the disastrous Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984).
• This new doctrine imposed liability without exceptions on enterprises engaged in hazardous activities, marking a significant legal advancement in environmental and public safety law.

Characteristics of Absolute Liability

• No Exceptions Allowed: Unlike strict liability, no defenses such as "act of God," statutory authority, or plaintiff's fault are permissible.
• Applies to Hazardous Activities: Only those enterprises engaged in inherently dangerous or hazardous activities qualify under this doctrine.
• Liability for Escape and Damage: Liability arises if a dangerous substance or thing escapes and causes harm to persons or property.
• Liability Even Inside the Premises: Liability applies to injuries caused inside or outside the premises; escape outside land is not necessary.
• Higher Standard than Strict Liability: Absolute liability places a heavier burden of responsibility on hazardous industries without limitations.

Key Case Studies

1. Rylands v. Fletcher (1868)

• This English case established the principle of strict liability.
• Fletcher suffered damage when water from Rylands’ reservoir escaped through old mine shafts.
• Rylands was held liable even without direct negligence, but with defenses available.
• This laid the foundation for later absolute liability doctrine.

2. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case, 1987)

• After a leak of oleum gas in Delhi, the Supreme Court imposed absolute liability on the hazardous activity enterprise.
• The court rejected any exceptions and held the enterprise fully liable for compensation.
• This case explicitly articulated the doctrine of absolute liability in India.
• It established a precedent for holding industries accountable for environmental and public harm.

3. Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984)

• One of the worst industrial disasters globally leading to thousands of deaths.
• The Indian judiciary applied absolute liability to hold the chemical plant owners liable for catastrophic harm.
• This case emphasized the need for enterprises to adhere strictly to safety norms under the doctrine.

4. Read v. Lyons and Co.

• The plaintiff was injured by an explosion during duty at her workplace.
• The court held the company liable even though the accident occurred on its premises, emphasizing inherent danger and employer responsibility.

Illustration of Doctrine of Absolute Liability

Suppose a chemical factory engaged in producing hazardous substances has an accidental leakage of toxic gas that causes injury and property damage both inside and outside its premises.

• Under the doctrine of absolute liability, the factory owner is fully liable to compensate victims for all damages.
• It does not matter whether the factory took all possible safety precautions or if the leakage happened due to an unforeseen circumstance.
• No defense based on negligence, employee fault, or external events is allowed.
• This ensures maximum protection for public safety from hazardous activities.

Differences Between Strict Liability and Absolute Liability

Conclusion

• The doctrine of absolute liability is a stringent and progressive legal principle developed primarily in Indian tort law to ensure enterprises engaged in hazardous activities are held fully accountable for damages caused.
• It evolved to overcome the limitations of strict liability by removing all exceptions and defenses, thereby prioritizing public safety and environmental protection.
• This doctrine rests on the principle that entities undertaking dangerous activities for profit must bear the entire risk of harm to others, without resorting to excuses.
• The landmark cases of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and the Bhopal Gas Tragedy have solidified its place in Indian law, setting a precedent for demanding high standards of care and responsibility from hazardous industries.
• Overall, absolute liability serves as a powerful tool to enforce corporate accountability and provide justice for victims of industrial disasters and other dangerous undertakings.