Strict Liability Tort: What It Is And Examples (2026)

Quick Overview: The Three Types of Torts

In tort cases, plaintiffs pursue defendants for damages, or compensation for their losses. Plaintiffs are those who have suffered harm, while defendants are those who allegedly caused the harm. There are three main types of tort cases:

Strict Liability Torts

With these torts, a defendant may be held liable for damages caused by their actions or products. They may be liable even if they did not act negligently or with ill intent.

Toxic tort cases are a common example. In these cases, a manufacturer of a dangerous drug, chemical or other substance may be liable for the damage it caused, even if the manufacturer had no reason to believe the product was harmful.

Intentional Torts

Intentional torts hold defendants civilly liable for deliberate harm. If a defendant commits assault, rape or a similar offense, they may be held criminally responsible, but if the victim wants to recover compensation for the harm they suffered, they may file an intentional tort case.

Negligence-Based Torts

Many tort cases are based on negligence. If you file a lawsuit after being injured in a car accident, you’re likely pursuing a negligence-based tort.

To win one of these torts, you usually must prove the elements of negligence, which include:

• The defendant owed you a duty of care.
• They breached that duty.
• The breach caused you harm.
• You have damages to collect as a result.

If the court finds that the defendant’s negligent conduct caused you harm, the defendant may be ordered to pay you damages.

What Is Strict Liability? Tort Law and the Plaintiff's Burden of Proof

In most tort cases, the plaintiff must prove a defendant had a duty under the law to act a certain way and breached that duty either intentionally or negligently. Strict liability removes the burden on a plaintiff to prove any fault or wrongdoing. A plaintiff only needs to show they were harmed by the defendant's action, inaction or product and provide evidence of their damages.

The purpose of strict liability is to protect the public from undue harm by placing the responsibility squarely on those engaged in potentially dangerous activities or producing high-risk products. This legal approach compels businesses to adopt rigorous safety measures from the outset, benefiting both consumers and the public at large by minimizing preventable hazards.

Strict liability applies in very limited situations where public policy demands that, regardless of their intent, certain parties should bear the responsibility for any harm that results from their actions. The primary rationale is to protect the public and encourage safer practices by holding those engaged in potentially hazardous activities or products accountable for any harm they cause.

Key Elements of Strict Liability

Strict liability usually only requires proof that the instrument that caused the injury was within the control of the other party. In fact, strict liability is often better defined by what a plaintiff is not required to prove. Specifically, an injured plaintiff does not need to prove any of the following about the defendant:

• They knew about the danger
• They should have prevented the injury
• They intended the injury

For example, consumers injured by dangerous drugs typically only need to prove that the drugs were defective when they left the factory. They do not need to prove that the manufacturer knew about the defect, intended to release a defective drug or acted carelessly in failing to find the defect.

Understanding What Is Strict Liability in Tort Law

Generally, civil laws don't hold individuals liable for harm unless they have failed to take reasonable steps to prevent injury to others. In cases where strict liability applies, a defendant can be held liable even if they took every possible measure to prevent harm to others.

The principle of strict liability aims to promote safer practices and protect the public. It applies to some claims because of historical precedent (past legal rulings that guide modern court decisions). In other cases, strict liability is established by law. Strict liability is especially relevant in areas where safety is crucial, such as products, hazardous materials, and public services. Cases where strict liability often applies include those involving:

• Pets: Many jurisdictions have passed laws that hold owners strictly liable for injuries caused by their dogs or other domestic pets. If a dog attacks someone, its owner is responsible for all damages, regardless of whether the dog has a history of aggression or whether the owner took precautions to prevent the bite.
• Hazardous Materials: Strict liability applies to those who handle or store dangerous materials like chemicals, toxins and other substances that pose significant risks to people and the environment. Companies handling such materials are liable for any harm resulting from leaks, spills or other incidents, regardless of the precautions they have taken.
• Explosives: The use, storage and transportation of explosives are inherently dangerous activities subject to strict liability. Entities involved in such activities are responsible for any resulting damages, injuries or fatalities, regardless of the precautions taken to ensure safety.
• Highly Regulated Industries: Some industries, including pharmaceuticals and aviation, are subject to strict liability due to the significant risks associated with their products and services. These industries are heavily regulated to protect public safety, and strict liability ensures that companies are accountable for any harm caused by their operations or products.
• Product Liability: Strict liability is a common doctrine in product liability cases. Manufacturers, distributors and retailers can be held strictly liable for defective products that cause harm to consumers, including design defects, manufacturing defects and failure to warn consumers about potential dangers.

Strict Liability Tort Examples

Although strict liability doesn't apply in many tort claims, numerous common situations illustrate its application. Examples include:

• A chemical manufacturing company that stores toxic substances may be held strictly liable if those chemicals leak and contaminate the local water supply. The company’s liability exists even if it had stringent safety measures in place, and it will likely face a class action lawsuit on behalf of the community.
• Strict liability also applies to cases where public safety is at high risk, such as zoos or aquariums. If a dangerous animal escapes and causes harm, the facility may be liable even if all safety protocols were observed. This reinforces that organizations must prioritize safety when handling potentially harmful elements, whether animals, chemicals, or explosives.
• A construction company using dynamite for demolition purposes would be strictly liable if an explosion damages nearby properties or injures bystanders. The high risk associated with explosives justifies the imposition of strict liability.
• Drug manufacturers may be held strictly liable if their product causes adverse effects or injuries, even if the company conducted thorough testing and complied with all regulatory requirements. (The Elmiron lawsuits are examples of this policy in action.) Holding manufacturers strictly liable for the safety of their products helps ensure they take thorough, effective safety precautions.
• A car manufacturer may be strictly liable if a defect in the vehicle’s braking system leads to an accident, injuring the driver and passengers. The manufacturer’s liability exists regardless of whether they were negligent in the design or production process.

Strict liability in tort law helps ensure that individuals and entities engaged in potentially dangerous activities or producing hazardous products are held to a higher standard of accountability under the law. Strict liability simplifies the legal process for injured parties and promotes a higher standard of safety and responsibility by removing the need to prove negligence or intent.

Strict Liability in Product Defect Cases

In most states, product liability cases fall under strict liability. To win these claims, the injured person must show the product was defective when it left the factory. A product defect can take these three forms:

• Design defects inherent in the product, making it dangerous for all intended uses
• Manufacturing defects in which the product fails to meet its specifications
• Labeling defects where the instructions and warnings fail to explain the safe use

Once the injured person proves the defect, the burden generally shifts to the manufacturer to present its defenses.

Strict Liability for Animal Attacks

People who keep dangerous animals are often covered by strict liability. When those animals attack unprovoked, the owner may be liable for the injuries. For example, in a dog bite lawsuit in many states, the victim only needs to prove that the dog belonged to the owner and that they were bitten while lawfully on public or private property.

Strict Liability and Dangerous Activities

Certain dangerous activities are covered by strict liability, including using explosives and demolishing buildings. An interesting issue arises when an exhibitor injures spectators during a fireworks show, though. Some states will impose strict liability due to the inherent risk of exhibiting fireworks. Other states may require injured victims to prove negligence.

Defenses to Strict Liability Claims

Because of the nature of strict liability, the primary defenses against these claims tend to involve the victim’s acts. If the victim triggered the traumatic incident, the other party might not be liable. For example, a manufacturer might defend itself by claiming that a consumer’s product misuse caused their injury.

Similarly, many states allow dog owners to defend themselves by asserting that the victim taunted the dog. Arizona, for instance, imposes strict liability for bites by aggressive dogs, but defines “aggressive” to only include dogs that bite unprovoked.

Assumption of risk is another relatively common defense to strict liability claims. For example, if you get hurt while using a new piece of sporting equipment, the manufacturer might argue that you knowingly accepted the risk of injury when you engaged in the sport.

Do I Need a Lawyer for a Strict Liability Case?

Despite covering fewer elements, strict liability cases can involve complicated factual and legal issues. The right attorney can guide you through the various steps of the legal process, such as:

• Attending an initial consultation
• Filing a lawsuit
• Exchanging information with the other side during the discovery phase
• Gathering evidence
• Calling expert witnesses and hearing their testimony
• Using pre-trial motions to address specific case issues
• Negotiating a settlement with the other side
• Taking the case to trial if no settlement is reached

A lawyer can gather the evidence and craft the legal arguments necessary to overcome defenses, establish liability and increase your chances of recovering compensation.

Need Help Finding a Local Attorney?

When you hire a lawyer to represent you in a strict liability tort case, your choice of attorney matters. There’s no way to guarantee a positive outcome, but choosing an experienced attorney greatly improves your chances of success.

At ConsumerShield, we’re committed to helping people across the country find the legal support they need. Contact us for a free case review today.