Strict liability

“Strict liability” is roughly identified with “objective responsibility”: the latter actually includes the former, adding vicarious responsibility (liability) and collective responsibility (liability). In fact, in strict liability" the offense is attributed to Tizio without investigating the latter's mens rea. In collective responsibility, however, the responsibility for the crime is attributed to a subject, without investigating his guilt, but based only on the guilt of the other competitors in the offense committed in collective competition, in which the first may or may not participate. And finally, Vicarious liability occurs when a crime is attributed to a person although the crime is committed by another person. According to some, the offense must be defined by external conduct without reference to the psychological condition at the time of the commission of the action in question: strict liability; the law would have the sole dissuasive function. Mens rea would only be relevant if the purpose of the punishment was retribution for past wrongs. Furthermore, it would be scientifically impossible to ascertain: identifying culpability and imputability. Conversely, the opposite position dismisses it as irrational to punish past facts without demonstrating a positive correlation between facts committed independently of the mens rea and future criminal facts: losing any distinction between the accidental or non-accidental nature of the event: following the thesis of strict liability would mean that everyone being able to commit an offense accidentally, everyone should be punished in advance. In fact, it is highlighted that the need to ascertain the mens rea for the attribution of a criminal sanction are threefold: preservation of individual freedom; distinction between punishment and medical treatment; unacceptable concrete consequences. It is highlighted, in fact, that a moral justification for using a human being as a means for the good of society (for example, to use it as a deterrent). This moral justification is to be found in the "demonstration that the person so treated could have helped doing what he did". The principle of the rule of law defends citizens from "vague, secret and retroactive laws" and, according to Hart, is expressed (among other things) in the formula actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. The mens rea requirement, therefore, is seen in close connection with the principle of the rule of law, of the rule of law. The presence of the mens rea as a necessary requirement for the attribution of strict liability prevents the innocent from being convicted, i.e. those who lack the "subjective elements" and do not possess the relevant "mental conditions". The awareness that one will not be punished except for those desired or foreseen acts is a guarantee for the citizen against the arbitrariness of the state: principle of calculability of the legal consequences of one's conduct.^[1]

In criminal and civil law, strict liabili"objective responsibility of liability under which a person is legally responsible for the consequences flowing from an activity even in the absence of fault or criminal intent on the part of the defendant.^[2]

Under the strict liability law, if the defendant possesses anything that is inherently dangerous, as specified under the "ultrahazardous" definition, the defendant is then strictly liable for any damages caused by such possession, no matter how careful the defendant is safeguarding them.^[3]

In the field of torts, prominent examples of strict liability may include product liability, abnormally dangerous activities (e.g., blasting), intrusion onto another's land by livestock, and ownership of wild animals.^[4]

Other than activities specified above (like ownership of wild animals, etc), US courts have historically considered the following activities as "ultrahazardous":^[5]

storing flammable liquids in quantity in an urban area
pile driving
blasting
crop dusting
fumigation with cyanide gas
emission of noxious fumes by a manufacturing plant located in a settled area
locating oil wells or refineries in populated communities
test firing solid-fuel rocket motors.^[6]

On the other hand, US courts typically rule the following activities as not "ultrahazardous": parachuting, drunk driving, maintaining power lines, and letting water escape from an irrigation ditch.^[7]

^ Faroldi, Federico L. G.; Faroldi, Federico L.G. (2016). "Strict Liability vs. Responsabilità Oggettiva. The Hart-Wootton Debate". Rivista di filosofia del diritto (2/2016). doi:10.4477/84942. ISSN 2280-482X.
^ Gray, Anthony (2021-02-25). The Evolution from Strict Liability to Fault in the Law of Torts. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5099-4100-1.
^ Best, Arthur; Barnes, David W.; Kahn-Fogel, Nicholas (2018-02-13). Basic Tort Law: Cases, Statutes, and Problems: Cases, Statutes, and Problems. Aspen Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4548-9763-7.
^ Hylton, Keith N. (2016-06-06). Tort Law: A Modern Perspective. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-12532-2.
^ Emanuel, Steven L. (2024-01-26). Emanuel Law Outlines for Torts. Aspen Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5438-0757-8.
^ Wagner, Gerhard (2005-10-27). Tort Law and Liability Insurance. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-3-211-24482-1.
^ Baldwin, Scott; Jr, Francis H. Hare; McGovern, Francis E. (2012-12-13). Product Liability Case Digest, 2013-2014 Edition. Wolters Kluwer. ISBN 978-1-4548-0984-5.

[1] Faroldi, Federico L. G.; Faroldi, Federico L.G. (2016). "Strict Liability vs. Responsabilità Oggettiva. The Hart-Wootton Debate". Rivista di filosofia del diritto (2/2016). doi:10.4477/84942. ISSN 2280-482X.

[2] Gray, Anthony (2021-02-25). The Evolution from Strict Liability to Fault in the Law of Torts. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5099-4100-1.

[3] Best, Arthur; Barnes, David W.; Kahn-Fogel, Nicholas (2018-02-13). Basic Tort Law: Cases, Statutes, and Problems: Cases, Statutes, and Problems. Aspen Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4548-9763-7.

[4] Hylton, Keith N. (2016-06-06). Tort Law: A Modern Perspective. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-12532-2.

[5] Emanuel, Steven L. (2024-01-26). Emanuel Law Outlines for Torts. Aspen Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5438-0757-8.

[6] Wagner, Gerhard (2005-10-27). Tort Law and Liability Insurance. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-3-211-24482-1.

[7] Baldwin, Scott; Jr, Francis H. Hare; McGovern, Francis E. (2012-12-13). Product Liability Case Digest, 2013-2014 Edition. Wolters Kluwer. ISBN 978-1-4548-0984-5.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]