Strict Liability

Question 1

Broadly, what are the 3 categories of strict liability?

Answer 1

1. Wild animals
2. Abnormally dangerous activities
3. Product liability

Question 2

What is the rule for domestic animals that cause harm?

Answer 2

No strict liability for the owner, unless the owner knew that their pet had a dangerous propensity

Question 3

What is the standard for wild animals that cause harm to others?

Answer 3

The owner is strictly liable no matter what safety precautions they took

Question 4

Does strict liability for wild animals cover harm causes only as a direct result of the animal?

Answer 4

No, liability also extends to harm resulting from people fleeing from the danger

Question 5

What counts as an abnormally dangerous activity?

Answer 5

Explosives

Highly toxic chemicals/biologicals

Radiation

Nuclear

Question 6

For abnormally dangerous activities, will the D’s liability extend to any person that is injured?

Answer 6

No, the harm must result from the kind of danger anticipated from the abnormally dangerous activity. Need to be a reasonably foreseeable victim.

Question 7

What is the test for abnormally dangerous activities?

Answer 7

1. The activity IS just dangerous (creates a foreseeable risk of harm)
2. The activity is uncommon in the place it’s carried out
3. Safety precautions are irrelevant

Question 8

For product liability, who can sue?

Answer 8

Any reasonably foreseeable victims or bystander. It’s not limited to the original purchaser of the product

Question 9

What is the prima facie case that the P must prove to show that the D is liable for product liability?

Answer 9

1. D is a routine merchant
2. Product is defective
3. The defect is the factual and proximate cause of the P’s injuries
4. Damage to person or property

Question 10

For product liability, what are the three types of “defect” you might see?

Answer 10

1. Manufacturing defect, where the product departs from its intended design
2. Design defect, where the risks of the product outweighs its usefulness.
   P can establish this by showing that the less risky design had the same utility. But the design must be (i) safer, (ii) economic, and (iii) practical for its use.
3. Information defects, meaning that the product has residual risks that (i) cannot be designed out, (ii) those risks aren’t apparent to the consumer, and (iii) its lacks adequate warnings

Question 11

Products that move along the ordinary channels or distribution will be presumed to….?

Answer 11

Not have been altered

Question 12

In order to prove damages for product liability, the P just show what use for the product?

Answer 12

That they were making a foreseeable use of the product.

Question 13

If a manufacturer inspects a product before it leaves the factory but failed to spot a non-obvious defect, will that absolve them of product liability?

Answer 13

No, because it’s strict liability. Only relevant for negligence.

Question 14

Are there any defences for strict liability?

Answer 14

Usually not. Only where you act very recklessly/voluntarily assume the risk.