What is the primary factor that diffrentiates strict liablity from absolute liablity ?
Strict liability demands that the plaintiff demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty of care, that obligation was breached, and that the plaintiff's injuries were the result
Strict liability demands that the defendant demonstrate that the plaintiff owed them a duty of care, that obligation was breached, and that the plaintiff's injuries were the result
Strict liability demands that the plaintiff demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty of trust, that obligation was breached, and that the plaintiff's injuries were the result
Strict liability demands that the plaintiff demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty of care, that obligation was breached, and that the plaintiff's injuries were the result indirectly.
A person or organisation is subject to liability for harm brought on by their actions, even if they were not negligent or at fault, under the legal doctrine of absolute liability. In contrast, strict liability demands that the plaintiff demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty of care. Hence, option a is correct.