Under strict liability, liability is imposed without fault for abnormally dangerous activities, wild animals, or products. Which term best fits this concept?

Under strict liability, liability is imposed without fault for abnormally dangerous activities, wild animals, or products. Which term best fits this concept?

• A. Negligence
• B. Strict Liability
• C. Assumption of Risk
• D. Res Ipsa Loquitur

Answer: (B)

Strict liability means holding someone legally responsible for harm caused by certain activities or items, even without proof of fault. This concept applies when the activity is abnormally dangerous, when wild animals are involved, or when a product is defective and causes injury. The key idea is that the risk is so great or the nature of the item so inherently dangerous that society assigns responsibility to the actor regardless of care taken. This is why the correct term fits: liability imposed without fault for those kinds of hazards. In contrast, negligence requires showing a duty, breach, causation, and harm; assumption of risk is about the plaintiff knowingly accepting the danger; and res ipsa loquitur is a method for inferring negligence when the circumstances strongly suggest it, not a standard that imposes liability regardless of fault.

Strict liability means holding someone legally responsible for harm caused by certain activities or items, even without proof of fault. This concept applies when the activity is abnormally dangerous, when wild animals are involved, or when a product is defective and causes injury. The key idea is that the risk is so great or the nature of the item so inherently dangerous that society assigns responsibility to the actor regardless of care taken.

This is why the correct term fits: liability imposed without fault for those kinds of hazards. In contrast, negligence requires showing a duty, breach, causation, and harm; assumption of risk is about the plaintiff knowingly accepting the danger; and res ipsa loquitur is a method for inferring negligence when the circumstances strongly suggest it, not a standard that imposes liability regardless of fault.