Actus Dei Nemini Facit Injuriam


Literal Meaning

The law holds no man responsible for the act of God


This doctrine has been originated from Latin

It usually describes the exception of liability of any person in certain matters.

We know that liability arises due to ill action or non-action (default in duty)of any act, but when like an act of God is there, no default can be traced on part of any person, thus it places itself as an exception from any sort of liability.


Act of god- it refers to the act done on its own i.e. naturally without any human involvement is stated as act of god

Doctrine- if any event happens due to natural causes without the intervention of any person, such an act will said as an act of god. These incidents are inevitable in nature so no one can be held responsible for it. Thus this doctrine exemplifies that such an act is an exception in case of liability of any person in case of an Act of God. Through this law, no man is held responsible for such an act and it is not considered as a lawful duty of that person.

Foreseeability The foresight of such act will not mark any exception and carries out the duty of the human beings. In this case if the event was foreseen and the injury or the accident happened because of the negligence of any person, then such a person can be given the verdict of negligence on his part.

Case laws

Nicholas vs. Marshlands

In this case the defendant was not held for the liability because of the fact that embankments of an artificial lake were swayed by the unprecedented rainfall. The court held that though the Plaintiff suffered injury but the act was done be natural cause, so the defendant according to the doctrine of Actus Dei Nemini Facit Injuria can’t be held liable for the same.


Shridhra Tiwari vs. U.P. State Road Transport

In this case a bus of UPSRTC collided with a cyclist who came without notice came up in front of the bus. Just to save the cyclist, the bus driver applied the brakes without knowing that the road was wet, due to which the bus skidded and the rear part of bus got struck in the front part of another bus in back. Here the court held that this type of collision and accident was of inevitable nature, thus the bus driver is free of any sort of liability.

R.A. Arunachala Iyer vs. C. Subbaramiah

In this case the Madras High Court Bench held that “It is not right in cases of this kind that the man should have his case disposed of without being heard. The Courts are here so that people who have cases can have those cases heard and determined, and it should never be the intention of the court that a man should be deprived of a hearing unless there has been something equivalent to misconduct or gross negligence on his part or something which can be put right, so far as another side is concerned, by making the man blame pay for it”.

Thus from this it can be drawn that if no negligence is there on part of the person then no liability can be held against that person.

Also Read: Actus legis nemini facit injuriam

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *