Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Strict product liability
Strict product liability
Strict product liability
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Strict product liability
Product liability concept is the legal liability a manufacturer or a retail trader incurs for producing or selling a faulty product. For instance, when an individual is injured as a result of a defective product, the aggrieved person may take an action or sue the company that manufactured, sold, leased or designed the product. In other words, the firm may be liable to the person for causing an injury thus may be required to compensate him or her for the damages. I am currently an Assistant Buyer for Belk Department Stores. At Belk we not only merchandise, we also have several private label goods that we manufacture. Notably, there are three types of product liabilities in the retail industry, namely manufacturing, design and marketing defects. Manufacturing defects results in the manufacturing process; design defects occur where the design of the product is dangerous, and marketing defects is due to non-obvious dangers (Sherrow & Marzilli, 2010). Mostly, when a product injures a person he or she may base his or her recovery of damages on either of the following theories, negligence, and breach of warranty or strict tort liability. Negligence is the failure to exercise care to avoid injuring a person to whom you owe the duty of care. Breach of warranty is a claim or promise made about the type, quality as well as the performance of the product. On …show more content…
Currently, retail industries are producing products of good design to meet technical and legal requirements. For instance, products are of satisfactory, good quality and fulfil the purpose the client is expecting. In addition, most companies are complying with the environmental law as well as making sure the product has no unintended side-effects. Notably, some laws such as General Product Safety are now enforced to ensure consumers are sold products that are safe and to maintain the general duty placed on retail
Like in our book The Legal Environment of Business stated, “any person, who is injured by a product may bring a negligence suit even though he or she was not the one who actually purchased the product”. Therefore, no, priority of contract would not be required for Kolchek to succeed in a product liability action against Great Lakes because the buyer does not need to have to directly involved with the manufacture, as long as the product was made from the manufacture itself.
Engineers, contractors, and other businesses must be mindful of and knowledgeable of their legal obligations when performing their occupation or supplying a product. Negligence in the design or construction of a product that results in damage or bodily harm, or could result in damage or bodily harm, can result in liability for economic loss under Canadian Tort law. Engineers, architects, and contractors need to be respectful of their duty of care to ensure their product is precisely produced with no danger of negligence.
...with a return policy’s. Guarantee to their customers. However customers trust both companies.to support the need for high value, operations must be ensure that their production are high of quality and usually undamaged.
Those who purchased the defective phones will likely be eligible to receive either a full refund or an exchange for a device of equal value. Product liability; although it is less strict in Canada, is a concept that attempts to hold a seller liable for a defective product that it sells. Even though this is not as strictly enforced in Canada, it is likely that Tri-Star would indeed be held accountable in this situation, and one can examine the case of Samsung's exploding Galaxy Note 7 devices to further confirm this. Anyone who purchased a Note 7 prior to Samsung issuing the recall of these devices was and is eligible to receive a full refund or exchange. There is also a legal theory known as implied warranty of merchantability.
However, it is easier to directly resolve problems with the business. If you choose to directly approach the importer or manufacturer, you are only entitled to recover the cost from them. This includes compensation for damage or loss and the reduction in the product’s value. Some fair ways to address these issues are to get a repair, replacement, or refund, however, you aren’t always entitled to one. As previously stated, exceptions to the repair, replace or refund policy include if the product satisfies its use but the consumer changes their mind, found it cheaper elsewhere, purposely
Customers can experience severe and appalling injuries in a broad range of conditions on store property. For instance, in a cash and carry store a customer can slip on a big leakage and later hit their head, as a result causing critical shocking brain injury. At a park, a customer can exactly fall out of a plaything and put to death, On the other hand a small kid can drown in a garden pool, or they can be bitten by a dog in a vicious manner, causing critical injuries. Conversely, a woman can be assaulted and pierced forcefully in a dark parking area, coming under security negligence. All the instances come under premises liability.
A tremendous rise in world population and use of natural resources, we have a tendency to all got to effectively combat these will increase by usage merchandise. Additionally, usage saves not solely the resources that get in making product however conjointly lowland area o...
Noel, Dix. “Defective Products: Abnormal Use, Contributory Negligence and Assumption of Risk” Vanderbilt Law Review. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002. 313-23. Print.
Notably, the class of potential defendants in a product liability is extensive; it may include everyone in the distribution chain of the product (Wong 2010). The defendant may range from the manufacturer of the product to the seller or the lessor of the product. In addition, anyone who services the product or installs the product after purchase may stand liable in the event that the product is defective. Principally, the basis of action in a product liability litigation are the negligence, intent, strict liability, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and general misrepresentation (Wong 2010). In practice, prosecutions in product liability have significantly relied on the Third Restatement of Torts, on section 402A
Beauty equipments should always be in good condition to offer optimum results. However, when an injury is sustained by fault equipment, then someone is liable for the damages. The first step is to determine whether the equipment was well maintained and inspected. If there was no good maintenance of the equipment, the liability lies with the salon business. However, the error may be a manufacturing error.
Responsibility for a product defect that causes injury lies with all sellers of the product who are in the distribution chain. The law entails that a product meets the everyday expectations of the consumer. When a product has an unpredicted defect or danger, the product cannot be said to meet the normal expectations of the consumer. There is no federal product liability law. Usually, product liability claims are based on state laws, and brought under the concepts of negligence, strict liability, or breach of warranty.
Consumers have expectations In terms of a good quality product that should be availed at a reasonable price. Consumers don’t only want the business to be socially responsible towards them in this manner of reasonable prices but way beyond this. They should meet the needs of consumers in ways of convenience and appearance. But business should also consider other aspects like environmental impact when packaging is disposed.