Decisions in product liability cases sometimes make headlines, with much of the

Question

Decisions in product liability cases sometimes make headlines, with much of the public outraged over what seems to be an excessive recovery for action seen to be the fault of the plaintiff. Is it too easy to recover in product liability? Why has the law changed over the past several decades to eliminate the need to prove negligence? Who wins and who loses as a result of these changes? What changes would you make if you could? Analyze and evaluate the various issues presented while arguing and debating the connections between business, law, politics, and ethics. (Points : 30)

Explanation / Answer

Many persons believe that strict liability has led to safer products overall. The headline cases represent a small fraction of product liability cases. Among the general reasons for the imposition of strict liability are the increasing complexity of products (making it harder for consumers to judge their safety) and the multi-layer distribution system whereby a privity requirement or the necessity to prove negligence would often work an injustice.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse D
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.