Liability arising from dangerous activities (በአደገኛ ሥራ ምክንያት የሚመጣ ኃላፊነት) within the Ethiopian legal framework is classified as a regime of strict liability, or liability without fault. According to the binding interpretations of the Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, specifically in Cassation File No. 57904, 63231, and 58224, any individual or entity that carries out an activity creating a special risk of harm to the public is legally responsible for any damage resulting from that activity, even if no negligence or fault can be attributed to them. This principle is anchored in Articles 2069(1) and (2) of the Civil Code, which posit that the inherent danger of the work itself necessitates a guarantee of compensation for those injured by it.
This strict liability regime is particularly relevant to organizations managing high-energy resources or hazardous infrastructure, such as the Ethiopian Electric Service. In Cassation File No. 170846, 253719, and 254878, the court held that providers of electrical energy are strictly liable for damages caused by their high-voltage lines because they bear a legal duty to control and maintain dangerous equipment that poses a constant threat to safety. Similarly, the law imposes strict liability on the owners and users of motor vehicles under Article 2082(1). As established in Cassation File No. 107133, 176217, and 216948, the owner of a motorized vehicle is liable for damage caused by the vehicle regardless of personal fault. It is important to distinguish motor vehicles from non-motorized ones; for instance, Cassation File No. 171133 clarifies that bicycle owners are not subject to this strict liability regime and are only liable if actual fault is proven under Article 2087.
The liability of building owners under Article 2077(1) also follows a strict liability model, though it is limited to specific circumstances. In Cassation File No. 52595, the court ruled that a building owner is liable without fault only when the damage arises from the collapse of the building or parts of the structure falling off. However, if an injury occurs to a worker during the construction process, the liability is typically governed by the provisions of the Labor Proclamation rather than the general dangerous activity articles of the Civil Code.
A party subject to strict liability can only be relieved of their obligation to pay compensation if they can prove that the damage was caused entirely or partially by the fault of the victim. Pursuant to Article 2086(2) and decisions like Cassation File No. 57904 and 63231, the burden of proof is on the defendant to demonstrate the victim’s negligence or intentional act to escape liability. Furthermore, for liability to attach, there must be a confirmed causal link between the dangerous activity and the injury. As noted in Cassation File No. 117834 and 167508, establishing this causation often requires forensic evidence or expert testimony to ensure that the activity was the proximate and direct cause of the harm.