Appendix 5: Accessible text versions of the Suggesting counterarguments prompts and outputs

Prompt:

Act as an expert in Law. List opposing viewpoints of strict and absolute liability and provide thorough reasoning.

Output:

As an AI, I can provide a general overview of the opposing viewpoints of strict and absolute liability based on the information I was trained on up to September 2021. However, for a more comprehensive understanding, it’s always best to consult with a legal expert or refer to legal textbooks and resources.

Strict Liability: Strict liability is a legal doctrine where a party is held responsible for their actions regardless of their intent or mental state at the time of the incident. It is often applied in cases involving inherently dangerous activities or defective products.

Supporters of strict liability argue that it promotes public safety by holding individuals or entities accountable for the consequences of their actions, regardless of intent. This can encourage higher standards of care and diligence.

However, critics argue that it can be unfair, as it can result in punishment even when there was no intent to cause harm or when all reasonable precautions were taken. It may also discourage innovation and risk-taking due to fear of potential liability.

Absolute Liability: Absolute liability is a more extreme form of strict liability. It applies in situations where defendants are held liable for damages even if they were not negligent and took all possible precautions to prevent harm.

Proponents of absolute liability argue that it provides a strong deterrent against harmful activities and ensures that victims are compensated for their losses. It is often applied in cases involving ultra-hazardous activities where the potential for harm is high.

Critics, on the other hand, argue that absolute liability can be excessively punitive and unjust, as it holds parties liable even when they have taken all possible precautions to prevent harm. This could potentially discourage beneficial activities that carry some level of risk.

Please note that the application and interpretation of these legal principles can vary significantly depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of each case. For more detailed information, it would be best to consult with a legal expert or refer to legal textbooks and resources. Text created by generative AI: RMIT (2024). Val [Large language model]. https://val.rmit.edu.au The text copied to the clipboard is current as of 06 February 2024.

Return to Suggesting counter-arguments section.