In US, this trend is forcefully being adopted by many of the consumers who think that they have been harmed by these products and they really decide to take a legal action against those companies. This is the reason that there has been viewed a rapid growth of the litigation of product liability. This has even become an effective tool for the consumers to protect themselves as well as the society from the products that they consider harmful. The law has also been changed in this particular subject, i.e. from caveat emptor which means letting the buyer beware, to the strict liability for the manufacturing defects that the companies make which can also make the product irrational for the customers. Those manufacturers who actually produce or even distribute those products actually take the stance that this product liability has strengthened the customers’ legal representatives and it has also added an extra cost on the products that they are selling. They are also of the view that the harm inflicted to one person is a doubtful issue as there can be other reasons as well that might have inflicted him an injury and not their own product. So the heat is consistently generating across the US as well as other developed countries over the issue of product liability, in which the production companies are strongly opposed to the idea of one customers’ complaint to the court that might shut down even their whole business. What about those issues which are really dangerous for not just the one person but for whole society. The production companies are silent about those issues. The one and thorough example of the limited liability that seriously affects to, is the cigarette manufacturing companies. There are millions of people who want a legal action taken against these cigarette companies to be shut down as even the state laws say that smoking is really dangerous for health. In US in 2009, the most deaths in a year were the reason of the drugs and smoking. This is the reason that US society has now started taking strong actions against the cigarette manufacturing companies in US and this is the reason that now this case has been presented to the court and the hearings are now going on these days. Recently, the justices of the US Supreme Court have added two new cases to their docket which they considered the most serious to the whole society, and the cases were about drug and cigarette liability requirements. General theories concerning product liability: Most of the jurisdictions experience the cause of action of plaintiff to be based on the one or more than theories that they present in front of the judge(s). These theories are basically concerned with the negligence of the companies, breach of the warranty, misinterpretation of the product or service, and the strict tort liability. The negligence of the manufacturing companies actually refers to the irresponsibility, absence, and failure of the companies to exercise properly a care. A manufacturing company can be considered or held liable for the negligence it commits if the lack of the reasonable care in the production of a good, designing, or the assembling of particular good is done improperly, and in which the company is directly involved in causing a harm to its
Product Liability: The Case of Cigarette Manufacturers Introduction: Product liability refers to an area of law according to which different business manufacturing companies; distributing agencies, suppliers, as well as the retailers are held accountable in front of the local courts if the products or services they are offering to the public inflict injuries or are injurious to their health…
In criminal law, the state may order the individual who has committed the crime to compensate victims; however, in the law of tort, victims are not part of the criminal action and they themselves sue criminals for compensation. According to Paul (2011, p.225), law of tort is desirable for risks that third parties are involved in and there is no information.
Central to these legal uncertainties is the product liability directives enshrined in the Rome II regulations. The Rome II regulations, though credited for opening up trans-border trade, have also been a source of criticism for the uncertainties they have caused in respect to the choice of law applicable in trans-border product liability cases.
6 The Actions Taken 8 Impact of the Recall Incident 10 Conclusion 11 References 13 Appendices 15 Abstract With the fast growing world economy, the production is also intensified to meet the consumer’s ever-changing demands. It is imperative that products must comply with safety and quality standards to establish reputation and considerably reduce liability for the company.
Product liability law is a division of tort law which seeks to a cause of action against the product’s manufacturer, seller or designer in situations where a person is injured by the product. Over the years, product liability law has shifted the liability arising from an unsafe product from the consumer towards the seller in order to safeguard the consumer.
Indeed, at least two United States Courts of Appeals have been unable to predict whether a state's Supreme Court would follow the Restatement (Third) as it pertained to a point of unsettled law in that state.2 Nevertheless, the federal courts' preliminary references confirm the significance of ALI's product and lend support to our belief that the Restatement (Third) will have a significant influence in establishing a more uniform national products liability law.
The parties involved are the Expando Co. Expando manufacturers of wristwatch bands, Flexo Co. manufacturers of similar watchbands and Customs Service. The question that needs to be answered is: does Flexo have grounds to appeal and if so will the court overrule the decision of Customs Service The answer is yes.
A warranty is defined as an expressed or implied statement that some situation or thing is as it appears to be or is represented to be. It is usually a written guarantee of the integrity of a product and of the maker's responsibility for the repair or replacement of defective parts" (Merriam Webster Dictionary).
Argonaut Insurance Co.” With this concern, the essay intends to discuss about the aforesaid doctrines related to this case.
The term vicarious liability is viewed to remain as a sub-part of secondary obligation, under which an individual is usually considered to be
t segmentation and targeting a market through analysis of the market, in addition to understanding the behaviour of consumer and promoting a product’s value to consumers. Marketing activities like promoting a product in marketing is different from production or manufacturing,
6 pages (1500 words)Essay
Hire a pro to write a paper under your requirements!
Win a special DISCOUNT!
Put in your e-mail and click the button with your lucky finger
Apply my DISCOUNT
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you!Try us!
Let us find you an essay for FREE
Contact us via Live Chat, call us at +16312120006or send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org