Product sellers were liable for harms caused by any product that is "in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous," meaning "dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer...." (6) This was not, however, per se strict liability
in the traditional sense of that term as in the case of harm resulting from the keeping of dangerous animals or other abnormally dangerous activities in which liability for the resulting harm is automatic.
Additionally, a strict liability
rule will lead to optimal incentives for care taking for the polluter, since taking efficient care will minimize the expected accident costs which the potential polluter has to bear under a strict liability
From this perspective, the adoption of a regime of strict liability
is justified in cases in which the demand for product safety is highly homogeneous and frequent.
"If legally you have a claim, there's virtually no defense because it's a strict liability
statute," he said.
Thus, even with accurate consumer perceptions, the various liability rules are no longer equally efficient (in particular, strict liability
no longer leads to efficient purchase decisions).
As currently applied, Pennsylvania law represents a departure from generally accepted principles of strict liability
, relying on poorly instructed juries to solve the safe product puzzle without engaging in the risk/utility balancing at the heart of every design defect claim.
is not about negligence or fault, but about a social policy that shifts to the manufacturer the cost of compensating the injured consumer.
attaches to conduct that would not be considered
CFS has filed suit claiming negligence, strict liability
, and public nuisance--all of which are tort theories.
The SFA chief executive is trying to force through an edict on 'strict liability
' that has been formally sanctioned by all 210 FIFA nations.
I argue, in Part IV, that the simple strict liability
rule that applies in manufacturing defect cases--i.e., defects that result from glitches in the manufacturing process--is defensible in light of the information and expectations consumers are likely to have.
(13) The spectrum ranges from negligence to strict liability
. (14) The determination of which standard to apply seems loosely based on the perceived severity of each state's problem and its interpretation of existing common-law principles.