What is the difference between a negligence and a strict liability claim in a construction accident case?

In construction accident cases, negligence and strict liability are two different legal defenses that a plaintiff may use to prove that a defendant is responsible for an injury. Negligence is a claim that the defendant was careless or acted in a reckless manner that led to the plaintiff’s injury. The plaintiff has to prove that there was a duty of care that the defendant failed to meet, that they were injured as a result, and that the injury was a direct result of the defendant’s negligence. Strict liability on the other hand is a legal principle that assigns responsibility to a person or corporation regardless of negligence. This means that even if the defendant did not act in a careless manner, or did not act at all, they can still be held liable for the injury if the harm is a direct result of their actions or product. In a construction accident case, for example, a contractor may be held liable for an injury sustained by a worker even if they did not breach any safety regulations or carelessly supervise the situation. In summary, in order to prove a negligence claim in a construction accident case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant failed in their duty of care to prevent harm to the plaintiff. Strict liability on the other hand does not require proof of negligence and assigns responsibility to the defendant even if they did not act improperly.

Related FAQs

What is the difference between a negligence and a strict liability claim in a construction accident case?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts