Strict liability may hold manufacturers responsible for their products even if they acted with due diligence and reasonable care.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question restatement: The statement says that strict liability may hold manufacturers responsible for their products even if they acted with due diligence and reasonable care. Answer options: True; False.

Option 1: True. In strict liability for products, a manufacturer can be held liable for a defective product regardless of fault or due care. The key idea is that liability attaches due to the defect and the product’s use, not because the manufacturer was negligent. This means that even if the manufacturer exercised due diligence, implemented precautions, and followed industry standards, they can still be responsible if the product was defective and the defect caused injury or damage. The rationale behind strict liability is to shift the risk to producers who are in the best position to prevent harm and to ensure injured parties can recover without proving negligence. That said, strict liability typically allows some defenses, such as misuse, alteration, assumption of risk, or where the defect did not actually cause the injury, but the core premise remains that due care does not automatically shield a manufacturer from liability in a defect-related injury.

Option 2: False. This statement would be incorrect because it contradicts the fundamental idea of strict liability in product liability law. Under strict liability, the plaintiff does not need to prove the manufacturer’s negligence or lack of due care. Instead, the focus is on the defect, the product’s danger, and causal linkage to the injury. Therefore, saying that manufacturers are not liable even with due diligence misstates the doctrine. In other words, the existence of due care does not override the liability standard in strict liability claims, making this option inaccurate.

Strict liability may hold manufacturers responsible for their products even if they acted with due diligence and reasonable care.

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

Under what legal doctrine does a firm bear legal responsibility for injuries caused by something it made or sold, whether or not it was negligent?

An example of an ultra-hazardous activity is the manufacturing of dynamite.

A rule of strict liability leads to...

In a strict liability case, if it can be proved that a business was as careful as possible about its product or service, it is not held liable for the harm that results from its use.

Consolidated Trucking Company transports radioactive materials. Darla suffers from cancer. To succeed in a strict liability action against Consolidated, Darla must show that her injury was caused by

Strict liability in tort requires proof that the defendant’s conduct was intentional.

To sue for strict liability, privity is not required.

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler