Question

1. Is the doctrine of strict liability fair to manufacturers? Why (not)?

2. Is it fair to consumers?

3. What are some of the ultimate effects of such a doctrine (ex. regarding the cost and availability of products)?

Answer 1

1. I believe that the doctrine of strict liability is fair to manufacturers because if there is any defect in a product that is manufactured in the process then the manufacturer itself should be responsible in the context. There can be reasons like negligence which may cause a danger because the manufacturer did not warn the customer and there can be strict liability if there is a breach of warranty by the manufacturer failing to provide the claim that was promised by the organization.

2. Yes, it is fair to consumers as well because in this context the consumer is not responsible for the tort or liability caused and hence it is their right to claim compensation for the damages or for the defective product that the manufacturer or the seller is providing.

3. The primary objective of the doctrine is very much clear and that is managing the liabilities caused by any activity and to ensure that there is no loss or damage and if there is then that needs to be compensated. Due to this doctrine the manufacturing and selling process becomes more quality oriented and careful as well because any damage or defect will cause a liability to the manufacturer or seller. The cost may increase due to this but I feel that is fine because this doctrine is fair and actually makes the process better.