Absolute Care Essay

735 Words2 Pages

ABSOLUTE LIABILTY TO DUTY OF REASONABLE CARE: EVOLUTION OF THE LIABILITY OF BAILEE IN COMMON LAW
In early days, liability in bailment was absolute. The bailee, having been given the position of owner with regard to third parties, was liable to the bailor, and liability in those days meant strict liability. It was no excuse for the bailee to say that the damage or the failure to return was due to no fault of his own; he was liable in any case. The bailee had to safeguard the goods under all circumstances except against Act of God and enemies of the King. In Southcott v. Bennet , popularly referred to as The Southcote 's case and spoken of as 'the high water mark of the theory of absolute liability ' , where goods were delivered to a bailee …show more content…

Viscount Hertford, this stance(of imposing absolute liability on all bailees) was softened and Pemberton C.J. refused to apply the rule in Southcote 's case to a gratuitous bailee. It was laid down that "if money be given to one to keep generally without consideration and if the person be robbed, he is discharged".
Later on in Coggs v. Bernard , Lord Hold further reduced the scope of absolute liability by restricting it to those bailees who exercised a public calling. In this much celebrated case, a distinction was made been a gratuitous bailee and a bailee for reward(consideration). From the latter a reasonable duty of care was expected. Gratuitous bailees were liable only upon gross negligence. Subsequently in 1782, Lord Mansfield in Forward v. Pittard , further limited the absolute liability of bailee to common carriers alone, saying that a carriers is in nature of an insurer without the latter 's …show more content…

Section 152 adds that in absence of a 'special contract ' the bailee would not be liable for loss or damage to goods provided that he has taken the amount of prescribed in Section 151.

Section 151 lays down a uniform standard of care for all cases of bailment. Thus even gratuitous or involuntary bailees are bound to perform their duties with the same amount of care and diligence. Moreover the standard of care expected from the bailee under this section is that of an average prudent man in respect of his own goods of same quality, bulk and value. Thus, the extent of reasonable care and diligence would depend upon the facts of each case. For example where goods on a ship were lost due to heavy weather on high seas, the bailee was held to be liable as the weather, though unusual, was not unforeseeable and also in addition the goods were not properly stowed thus contributing to the damage. In Shanti Lal v. Tara Chand Madan Gopal, where the bailor 's goods were lost due to floods, the Allahabad High Court said that "...no cast iron standard can be laid down for the measure

More about Absolute Care Essay

Open Document