Home to Global Legal Information For Legal Professionals Home
Bare Acts
Rules and Regulations
Draft Agreement
Agreements & Contracts
Cyber Laws in IT & ITES

With the phenomenal and enormous growth of Internet specialized branch of Law called Cyber Law.

Immigration & Emmigration

When a person enters a new country for the purpose of establishing permanent residence and ultimately gaining citizenship , it is called

Immigration.But the residence of immigrants is subject to the conditions set by the Immigration Law.


Vicarious Liability & Rules Of Strict And Absolute Liability

iii) Vicarious Liability


Normally no person is held responsible for the wrongs done by someone else. However, there are few instances wherein a person can be held liable for the conduct of another person. This liability is known as Vicarious Liability.
The following relationships are the best examples of Vicarious Liability:
  • Liability of the Principal for the act of his Agent
  • Liability of the Partners
  • Liability of the Master for the act of his Servant
Liability of the Principal for the act of his Agent When a principal authorises his agent to perform any act, he becomes liable for the act of such agent provided the agent has conducted it in the course of performance of duties.

Liability of the Partners For the tort committed by a partner of a firm, in the normal course of business of that partnership, other partners are responsible to the same extent as that of the partner who is in fault. The liability thus arising will be joint and several.

Liability of the Master for the act of his Servant The liability of the master for the act of his servant is based on the principle of ‘respondeat superior’, which means ‘let the principal be liable’. This principle originates from the maxim ‘, Qui Facit per Alium Facit per se’ which means ‘he who does an act through another is deemed in law to do it himself’.
In tort, the wrongful act of the servant is thus deemed to be the act of the master. However, such wrongful act should be within the course of his master’s business and any act, which is not in the course of such business, will not make the master liable.

iv) Strict and Absolute Liability


Rules of Strict and Absolute Liability are based on the concept of ‘No fault liability’.At times a person may be held responsible for some wrong though there was no negligence or intention on his part to do such wrong.
This rule was laid down by the House of Lords in Rylands v Fletcher and hence it is also commonly termed as the Rule in Rylands v Fletcher.
In the case of Rylands v Fletcher, the defendant appointed some independent contractors to construct a reservoir in order to provide water to his mill. There were some unused shafts under the site, which the contractors failed to locate. After water was filled in the reservoir, it burst through those shafts and flooded adjoining coalmines belonging to the plaintiff. Even though the defendant was not negligent and had no knowledge of the shafts, he was held liable.
In India, this rule was formulated in the case of M.C. Mehta v Union of India (1987), wherein the Supreme Court termed it as ‘Absolute Liability’ This rule was also followed in the case of Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India (1996)
Section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1938 also recognises this concept of ‘liability without fault’.
The ingredients of the Rule of Strict Liability are:
  • Some hazardous thing must be brought by the defendant on his land.
  • There must be an escape of such thing from that land.
  • There must be a non-natural use of the land.
Exceptions to the Rule of Strict Liability:
  • If the escape of the hazardous good was due to plaintiff’s own fault or negligence
  • Vis Major or Act of God is a good defence in an action under the Rule of Strict Liability.
  • In cases where the wrong done has been by someone who is a stranger and the defendant has no control over him
  • Cases where the plaintiff has given his consent to accumulate the hazardous thing in the defendant’s land for the purpose of common benefit
  • Any act done under the authority of a statute