In English tort law, the principle of ‘strict liability’ is applied to hold a person legally responsible for the consequences flowing from an activity, even in the absence of fault or criminal intent on the person’s part. In 1987, the Supreme Court of India introduced a new principle- ‘absolute liability’, a far more stringent rule of liability without any exceptions, particularly to deal with industrial accidents. This principle imposed a liability on individuals who engaged in an inherently dangerous or hazardous activity for any harm done to any person while carrying out the activity.
Which one of the following assumptions is necessary to ensure the above argument logically follows?