What is the principle of "strict liability" in tort law?

The principle of "strict liability" in tort law refers to the accountability of a party for damages or harm caused by their actions without the need for proving negligence or fault. This means that a person or entity can be held liable for injuries or damages even if they exercised reasonable care and did not intend to cause harm.

This concept is often applied in specific contexts, such as with inherently dangerous activities or certain product liability cases, where the risks are so great that the law imposes liability regardless of the precautions taken by the defendant. It emphasizes the focus on the act itself and the consequences, rather than the conduct leading up to it. The principle thus shifts the burden of proof away from proving negligence, simplifying the process for injured parties seeking compensation.

In contrast, other concepts included in the choices highlight different bases for liability. For instance, liability only when negligence is proven requires demonstrating that the party failed to act with reasonable care, while liability based on contractual obligations pertains to breaches of agreements rather than tort law. Liability for intentional harm involves scenarios where harm is deliberately inflicted, differing fundamentally from the strict liability standard that does not concern itself with the defendant's intent or negligence.