History of contract law Roman law contained provisions for torts in the form of delictwhich later influenced the civil law jurisdictions in Continental Europebut a distinctive body of law arose in the common law world traced to English tort law. The word 'tort' was first used in a legal context in the s,  although different words were used for similar concepts prior to this time. Medieval period[ edit ] Torts and crimes at common law originate in the Germanic system of compensatory fines for wrongs OE unrihtwith no clear distinction between crimes and other wrongs.
Legal Basis for Liability in Product Cases Legal Basis for Liability in Product Cases A plaintiff may rely on one or more of several theories upon which to base his or her argument for recovery in a products liability case.
The primary theories for recovery include the following: Negligence The tort of negligence remains a central part of the law of products liability. In order to recover under a theory of negligence, a plaintiff must prove five basic elements, including the following: However, even if a plaintiff can prove that a manufacturer has failed to exercise the proper standard of care, the plaintiff cannot recover without proving two aspects of causation.
The plaintiff must also show that the defendant could have foreseen the risks and uses of the product at the time of manufacturing. Tortious Misrepresentation A claim in a products liability suit may be based on false or misleading information that is conveyed by the manufacturer of a product.
A person who relies on the information conveyed by the seller and who is harmed by such reliance may recover for the misrepresentation. This basis for recovery does not depend on a defect in the product, but rather depends on the false communication. Tortious misrepresentation may appear in one of three basic forms.
First, a person may commit fraudulent misrepresentation, or deceit, in which the person knows that a statement is false and intends to mislead the plaintiff by making the statement. Second, a person may commit negligent misrepresentation, where the person was negligent in ascertaining whether a statement was true.
Third, some jurisdictions allow for strict liability in instances where a manufacturer makes a public statement about the safety of a product. Warranty A warranty is a type of guarantee that a seller gives regarding the quality of a product.
A warranty may be express, meaning that the seller makes certain representations regarding the quality of a product.
Some warranties may also be implied due to the nature of the sale. The Uniform Commercial Code U. Strict Liability Section A of the Restatement Second of Torts included a provision that created strict liability on the part of a manufacturer.
Under this section, a manufacturer is liable for product defects that occur during the manufacturing process, notwithstanding the level of care employed by the manufacturer. Courts later extended the strict liability principles to include cases that did not involve errors in manufacturing, such as cases involving a failure of a manufacturer to provide ample warnings.
The Restatement Third of Torts: Products Liability applies strict liability rules to cases involving errors in manufacturing, but applies negligence rules to other types of products liability cases. Nevertheless, many states continue to apply the strict liability rules that were developed in older cases.
Liability for Used Products Different rules have developed in products liability law for those who sell or repair used products. In most instances, a person who repairs, rebuilds, or reconditions a product is liable if the person is negligent in treating the product, but the person is not subject to strict liability for defects.
In some instances, however, a person who re-manufactures a product may be subject to the same products liability rules as the original manufacturer. States are split regarding the bases of liability for sellers of used products.
Some states expressly exclude sales of used products from products liability rules. In other states, the general products liability rules apply. Defenses to Product Liability A defendant in a products liability suit may employ one of several defenses to liability.
One of the more common defenses is that the plaintiff misused the product in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable to the manufacturer. For instance, assume that a plaintiff wanted to sweep a number of rocks in his driveway back into a bed of rocks.
The plaintiff decides to use his lawnmower to shoot the rocks back into the rock bed. One of the rocks strikes and injures the plaintiff. The defendant could argue that using the lawnmower to move the rocks off of the driveway was not a reasonably foreseeable use of the product.
Similar defenses apply in breach of warranty claims.kaja-net.com 13 Jul Page 3 of 30 I have cited few of the landmark cases in torts, because excerpts from those cases are included in.
Case Study: Business Law - Final Paper Business Law Keith S. Ferguson This is a complex case, involving multiple parties and several variables that need to be examined thoroughly. Strict liability is the imposition of liability without fault for damages on the defendant.
This is different from negligence as the burden of proof is not placed on the plaintiff to prove that the damages were a result of the defendant’s negligence, only that damages occurred and the defendant is responsible.
Intentional Torts - Malice. Intentional torts are different from negligence claims, in that intentional torts are the infliction of injury or damage to property that was carried out with malice, willfulness or reckless disregard for the other person's rights.
Products Liability is a field of tort law which concerns the responsibility of the manufacturer or vendor of a product to ensure that products are safe and do not cause injury. Manufacturers and sellers have a defense to claims of strict liability that may be particularly important if you've owned the product for a while.
That is, you may not be able to claim strict liability if you knew about the defect but continued to .