Civil Wrong And Criminal Wrong Case Study

First, it is necessary to understand what “civil wrong and criminal wrong” is, so we can have a better climate to discuss what is at stake. A Civil wrong is “An action with a tort, an act against another person or their property, and, a breach of the terms of a contract”. (The law dictionary). On the other hand, a criminal wrong is the breaking of rules or laws for which some governing authority can ultimately prescribe a conviction. That being said, society would address liability for civil wrong separately from criminal wrong because, in a civil wrong, the plaintiff stands to benefit from the compensatory damages as well from the punitive damages. When a plaintiff sues the defendant to court, and he is able to establish that a civil wrong has been committed against him, the damages that follow could well be an incentive that leads society to address liability for civil wrong separately from criminal wrong. Such case is tried based on the civil burden of proof- a preponderance of the evidence. On the contrary,

Everybody is involved in commerce products usage and therefore strict liability is necessary to ensure that anybody injured as a result of using commerce product can have a redress and be entitled to compensatory and punitive damages. Also, another rationale for extending strict liability to everyday products sold in commerce is social policy. Businesses that operate in ultra-hazardous product like chemical and granite blasting engaged in profit making and therefore have to be extra-cautious to insure safety. More so businesses that engage in commerce products make profit out of this product. So when the product cause harm to people, strict liability is applied. This I think is a welcome development because when Company makes profits, they should make provision for strict liability damages as