Strict liability in tort requires proof that the defendant’s conduct was intentional.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks whether strict liability in tort requires proof that the defendant’s conduct was intentional.
Option 1: True. The statement claims that strict liability requires intentional conduct. In tort law, strict liability does not require proof of intent or negligent conduct; it imposes liability for certain activities regardless of fault. Therefore this option is incorrect because it misstates the core standard of strict liability.
Option 2: False. This option asserts that strict liability does not require intentional conduct, which aligns with the defining feature of strict liability: liability without proof of intent or negligence. In cases like abnormally dangerous activities or certain product liability scenarios, the plaintiff must show the defendant engaged in the prohibited activity or caused the injury, but not that the defendant acted with intent or carelessness. This makes the statement accurate in describing strict liability, and explains why the alternative is not correct.
To summarize the key idea: strict liability shifts the focus from the defendant’s mindset (intent or negligence) to the nature of the activity and the causal link to the harm, so requiring intentional conduct would be inconsistent with the doctrine.

BUSFIN 3500 SP2025 (4686) Chapter 6 Quiz

Strict liability in tort requires proof that the defendant’s conduct was intentional.

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

Under what legal doctrine does a firm bear legal responsibility for injuries caused by something it made or sold, whether or not it was negligent?

An example of an ultra-hazardous activity is the manufacturing of dynamite.

A rule of strict liability leads to...

In a strict liability case, if it can be proved that a business was as careful as possible about its product or service, it is not held liable for the harm that results from its use.

Consolidated Trucking Company transports radioactive materials. Darla suffers from cancer. To succeed in a strict liability action against Consolidated, Darla must show that her injury was caused by

Strict liability may hold manufacturers responsible for their products even if they acted with due diligence and reasonable care.

To sue for strict liability, privity is not required.

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler