A. Introduction

• Author: Philip H. Osborne
• Profession: Faculty of Law. The University of Manitoba
• Pages: 341-342

Page 341

The distinguishing feature of the strict liability torts is that there is no need to prove that the defendant was guilty of any wrongful (intentional or negligent) conduct. In the absence of defences, proof that the defendant caused the plaintiff’s loss in the manner prescribed is sufficient to impose liability. Strict liability does not play a significant formal role in modern Canadian tort law. Historically, the evolution of the common law of torts has been from strict liability to fault liability. Consequently, the remaining areas of strict liability tend to be ancient and few in number. Moreover, those torts of strict liability that do survive were eroded in the course of the twentieth century by the relentless expansion of the tort of negligence.

The torts of strict liability include the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher, liability for fire, the...