The law has shifted from making the injured user of a product prove that the product manufacturer was negligent in performing their duties to one of strict liability - liability without fault. What are the difficulties associated with proving someone in the manufacturing chain breached a duty of care to the customer (i.e. was negligent)? Which party (buyer or seller is most protected by the negligence approach?

2. Strict liability means that anyone in the chain of distribution (supplier, manufacturer, distributor, wholesaler, retailer) may be liable for an injury caused by a defective product even if they were as careful as they could possibly be. Which party (buyer or seller) is most protected by a strict liability approach? Explain.

3. Is strict liability fair to those people/parties in the chain of distribution? Which of the two, negligence or strict liability, do you think is the best system overall? Why?

https://www.coursehero.com/study-guides/wmopen-introbusiness/tort-law-liability-and-damages/ 

read the article above then answer

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Answer 1 The problems connected with demonstrating someone in the chain of distribution broke a duty of care to the consumer ie was negligent are The plaintiff needs to establish that the defendant ow... View the full answer