Strict Liability in Tort (Sales)

Question 1

Strict Liability in Tort places the burden for dangerous products that cause personal injuries or damage to “other” property on the

Answer 1

manufacturer or other seller.

Question 2

Policy Reasons

Answer 2

(i) the manufacturer created the risk; (ii) the manufacturer is in the best position to prevent problems from happening again; (iii) the manufacturer is the one profiting from the sale; and (iv) the manufacturer has the opportunity to spread the loss by purchasing insurance or increasing the prices for the goods.

Question 3

Because this is “strict liability” in tort, there is no need for the consumer to prove

Answer 3

negligence or intentional/willful wrong-doing. And because this is a tort action, there is no need to prove privity or that the consumer has given notice under UCC 2-607(3)(a).

Question 4

What must the consumer prove?

Answer 4

the product was unreasonably dangerous

Question 5

3 significant differences between suing in strict tort liability and suing on a warranty are:

Answer 5

(i) privity; (ii) notice; and (iii) the statute of limitations
Also, strict tort liability is only available for (i) personal injuries, and (ii) damage to property other than the item that was sold. It is not available to recover monetary loss attributable to the defective goods sold.

Question 6

Each party in the chain likely has a “relationship” only with their immediate seller and would have no relationship with parties further up the chain; thus,

Answer 6

a consumer who buys from a retailer likely has no relationship with the manufacturer.

Question 7

The retailer likely will notify the manufacturer, which will

Answer 7

give the manufacturer an opportunity to cure the defect.

Question 8

“Economic Loss Rule”

Answer 8

If there is only damage to the product sold, the customer cannot sue on strict liability in tort; the customer can only sue for breach of warranty /breach of contract.