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.

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

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.

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单