What is the term for the liability that can be imposed on individuals or businesses without proof of negligence?

The term for liability that can be imposed on individuals or businesses without proof of negligence is referred to as strict liability. This legal concept applies in certain situations, particularly where activities are inherently dangerous or when dealing with specific products that may cause harm regardless of the level of care taken to avoid such harm. In strict liability cases, the focus is on the act itself rather than the conduct of the parties involved.

For instance, if a manufacturer produces a defective product that causes injury, the manufacturer can be held strictly liable for damages resulting from that product, regardless of whether they acted negligently during the production process. This principle is particularly important in cases involving ultrahazardous activities or defective products, as it serves to provide an avenue for injured parties to seek compensation without the burden of proving negligence.

In contrast, intentional liability would require proof of purposeful misconduct, while vicarious liability involves holding one party liable for the actions of another, typically within an employer-employee relationship where negligence must still be established. Contractual liability pertains to the obligation to fulfill terms of a contract, which also requires proof of a breach rather than the absence of negligence. Thus, strict liability is distinct in its approach, focusing solely on the act and the resulting harm.