Strict liability remains valid for industrial accidents as it holds parties responsible without proving negligence. However, absolute liability, which allows no exceptions, is often preferred for hazardous industries to ensure greater protection and accountability, especially when public safety is at risk.

Both strict and absolute liability are valid doctrines, but they differ in their application and the exceptions allowed. Strict liability, while still relevant, may not always be sufficient for addressing the high-risk nature of modern industrial accidents. Absolute liability, with its no-exceptions approach, is often seen as a more comprehensive way to ensure accountability and compensation in such cases.

Strict liability is still a valid doctrine for many industrial accidents, as it holds parties accountable for harm from inherently dangerous activities but allows certain defenses like acts of God or third-party actions. However, for ultra-hazardous industries—especially those posing grave risks to public health and the environment—absolute liability, which allows no exceptions or defenses, is increasingly favored to ensure full accountability and public safety