Rule of Strict Liability and Absolute Liability in Indian Environmental Legal System: An Analysis

Abstract

Liability is exposedness to the sanctions of the law. It is incurred by the commission of a wrong and consists in those things which a person must do or suffer for having committed a violation of his duty.  Strict Responsibility is the legal theory that anyone who keeps a dangerous chemical on their property is responsible if that substance escapes and causes damage to property or people. The Absolute Liability states that businesses that participate in risky or intrinsically harmful operations are responsible if dangerous objects escape. In the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, the idea of absolute liability for damages caused by industry engaged in hazardous and intrinsically dangerous activities was newly developed and free from exceptions to the strict liability rule. In India, the rule of absolute liability was evolved in the case of M.C. Mehta and another v. Shri Ram Foods and Fertilizer Industries and others. These two principles/doctrines have the similar significance with some differences. Under the principle of strict liability, compensation for damages is determined based on the nature and extent of losses suffered. However, in cases of absolute culpability, exemplary damages must be awarded. The amount of compensation should exceed the actual harm caused because industrial accidents involving hazardous materials often lead to significant loss of life, extensive damage to property, and harm to the environment.