Difference Between Inevitable Accident And Act Of God

Accidents and natural disasters often raise questions about responsibility and liability. Two legal concepts—Inevitable Accident and Act of God—are commonly invoked as defenses in such cases, but they differ significantly in their application and implications. Understanding the difference between Inevitable Accident and Act of God is essential for interpreting liability in cases involving unforeseen events or natural disasters.

An Inevitable Accident refers to an unforeseen event that could not be avoided even with the exercise of reasonable care and skill. In contrast, an Act of God specifically pertains to extraordinary natural events like earthquakes, floods, or hurricanes that occur without human intervention and are beyond human control.

This blog explores the concepts, case laws, and distinctions between these two defenses, providing clarity on their relevance in legal disputes.

Inevitable Accident

An "inevitable accident" is an unexpected event that cannot be prevented by either person involved, no matter how careful or skilled they are. It is an accident that no one could have avoided, even if they tried their best.

Concept Of Inevitable Accident

In the past, if someone accidentally went onto someone else's property. Then, they could still be taken to court unless they could show the accident was something they couldn't avoid. The idea of an "inevitable accident" helped in these situations.

Previously, the accused had to prove they weren't at fault. Now, the person making the claim has to prove the other person was careless. However, the idea of "inevitable accidents" doesn't matter as much in these cases anymore, although it might still be necessary in some situations.

Case Laws Around Inevitable Accident

Here are some relevant case laws around inevitable accidents:

Stanley v. Powell

In this case, two people were hunting pheasants (birds). The defendant (the person shooting) aimed at a pheasant, but the shot bounced off an oak tree and accidentally hit the other person. The court decided that this was an accident. Since the defendant didn't intentionally harm the plaintiff, he wasn't responsible for the injury.

Vedant Acharya v. Highways Department of South Arcot

In this case, the Supreme Court said that even if an event like heavy rain or flooding happens, if it can be predicted and prevented with reasonable precautions, then the defence of an "inevitable accident" cannot be used. In other words, if the damage could have been avoided with care, the person responsible cannot claim it was unavoidable.

Padmavati v. Dugganaika

Two strangers took a lift in a jeep. Suddenly, one of the bolts holding the jeep's front wheel came loose, causing the wheel to detach. This caused the jeep to flip over, and one person was severely injured, eventually dying. It was decided that this was just an accident because there was no clear way to know the jeep had a problem. The driver and the jeep owner were not responsible for the accident since it couldn't have been avoided.

Meaning Of Act Of God

An "act of God" is a strong defence someone can use to avoid responsibility. It is similar to an inevitable accident but involves explicit damage caused by natural events, like heavy rain, hurricanes, floods, or earthquakes. For this defence to work, two things must be true:

• The cause must be a natural event.
• The event must be unusual and couldn't have been predicted or prevented.

Concept Of Act Of God

An "act of God" is a sudden and powerful natural event, such as an earthquake, flood, or tornado, that no one could have predicted or prevented. These events are so strong and unexpected that they cause massive damage, such as destroying property or taking lives.

These disasters are called "acts of God" because they are caused by nature. And they can strike without warning, leaving people shocked and harmed.

In such disasters, the person being blamed (the defendant) might use the "act of God" defence. They claim the damage was caused by nature, and they couldn't have done anything to stop it. To use this defence, the defendant must prove two things:

• The natural disaster directly caused the event and wouldn't have happened without it.
• They took all reasonable steps to prevent harm.

Case Laws Around Act Of God

Here are some case laws around the acts of god:

Nicholas v. Marsland

In this case, the defendant created an artificial lake by damming natural streams on his land. However, heavy rainfall, the heaviest anyone could remember, caused the dam to break, sweeping away the plaintiff's belongings. The court decided that the defendant was not responsible. Because an extraordinary natural event caused the damage, the defence of "the Act of God" applied.

Ramalinga Nadar v. Narayana Reddiar

In this case, the plaintiff hired the defendant to transport goods. However, a mob (a large and disorderly crowd of people) stole the goods, and the defendant couldn't prevent this. The court ruled that just because an event was out of the defendant's control, it doesn't automatically count as an "Act of God." The destruction caused by an angry mob was not considered an Act of God.

Kallulal v. Hemchand

In this case, the wall of a building collapsed on a rainy day when there was 2.66 inches of rain. The plaintiff's two children were killed in the accident. The court decided that this amount of rainfall during the rainy season was not extraordinary or unusual, so the defendant could not use the defence of the "Act of God." The defendant was held responsible for the accident.

Difference Between an Inevitable Accident and an Act of God

Here's the key difference between an inevitable accident and an act of god: