Q&A: Liability for Damages
Liability for Damages
Question
Hi, regarding liability for damages and the investigation by later authorities into whether the obligating factor is negligence in guarding or ownership itself—but really you need both as a sine qua non in order to be liable—can you find an example where I am at fault, but since I am not the owner I am automatically exempt? Because after all, we see that the concept of ownership was expanded to include a bailee or a robber, and even more so in the case of someone who stations another person’s animal, etc. So is there a case where I am at fault but am not the owner of the property that caused the damage, and therefore am exempt?
Answer
First, a robber is not liable for damages unless he has acquired it (see the beginning of the chapter “HaKones”). As for a bailee, that may be part of the bailment contract and not the ordinary passage of tort law. And regarding one who stations it, Tosafot and the Rashba disagree whether that is a case of a person causing damage or property causing damage.
Beyond that, there is the exemption in the case of someone who incites another person’s dog against someone else (Bava Kamma 24b).