Abstract

I am to argue in favour of strict liability as against the carrier and to oppose the limitation of damages, arguments which I advance with some satisfaction since I happen also to believe them.Strict liability is a doctrine more usually associated with the law of tort than the law of contract but as an injury resulting from an air crash is both contractual and tortious (and it even seems at one time to have been decided in America that the Warsaw Convention had itself created a cause of action), even if it be inelegant from a lawyer's point of view, I shall make no distinction between them. There are enough distinctions to be made on this topic without insisting on the lawyer's habit of mind.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.