Difference between Absolute Liability and strict liability?

The distinction between strict and absolute liability can be seen by examining the issue of causation.

For strict liability offenses no evidence of intent or any other mens rea is required. It is however normal for the prosecution to be required to prove causation. For example, in speeding it is necessary to prove the defendant was "driving", but not that he intended to drive faster than permitted, or even that he knew he was doing so.

Just like strict liability, absolute liability offences do not require evidence of intent or mens rea. As for causation, the prosecution only has to prove that the proscribed event occurred or situation existed, then the defendant will be liable because of his status.

So, in the EMPRESS CAR CASE the company was liable for the pollution of the river even though the diesel tap was turned on by an unknown stranger