Question.3613 - Why do you think a society would address liability for civil wrongs separately from criminal wrongs? Should a wrongdoer be potentially liable both for civil wrongs as well as for criminal wrongs related to the same wrongdoing? Sometimes people excuse the damage they cause by saying this was a mistake or that they did not mean to cause the damage. Is this a valid excuse to avoid liability for damage caused? Explain your answer. In common law countries, strict liability was originally imposed for abnormally dangerous activities. What was the rationale for extending strict liability to everyday products sold in commerce? Do you agree with this extension of strict liability? Explain your answer.
Answer Below:
Written xxxxxxxxxx Unit xxxxxx IzeagiUoPeople xxxxxxxxxx BUS x Business xxx and xxxxxx September xx Written xxxxxxxxxx Unit xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxx Stella xxxxxxx v xxxxxxxxxx wherein xx older xxxxx Stella xxxxxxx of xxxxx old xxx suffered x third-degree xxxx after xx unintended xxxxx of xxxxxx which xxx had xxxxxxxxx from xxxxxxxxx drive-through xx the xxxxxx over xxxxx over xxx thighs xxxxx and xxxxxxxx required xxxxxx and xxxxxxxx care xxxxx pushed xxxxxxx sue xxxxxxxxx over xxx claim xxxx coffee xxx excessively xxx and xxx temperature xxxxx a xxxxxx to xxxxxxxxx here xxxxx is x claim xx negligence xx Lieback xx terms xx arguing xxxx McDonald's xxxxxx its xxxxxx at xx unreasonably xxxx temperature xx neglecting xxx fact xxxx it xx creating x vulnerable xxxxxxxxxxx for xxx consumers xxx also xxxxxx it xxxxxx for xxxxxxxxxxx Cain xxxx McDonald's xxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxx temperature xxxxx to xx sustained xxxxxx - x well xxxxx the xxxxxxxx home-brewing xxxxxxxxxxx of xxxxxx F xxxxx provided xxxx with xxxxxxx taste xxx other xxxxxxxx while xxxxxxx while xxxxxxxxx attorneys xxx put xxxxx an xxxxxxxx that xxxxxxx coffee xx such xxxx temperature xxxxxx a xxxx considering xxx dangers xxxxxxxxxxx it xxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxx of x spill xxxx The xxxx alleged xxx negligence xxxxxx than xxxxxxxxxxx tort xxxxxxx of xxx intent xxxxx was xx intent xx harm xxxxxxx or xxxxxx liability xxxxxxx it xxxxxxxx liability xxxxxxx fault xxxxxxxxxxxx in xxx case xx involving xxxxxxxx dangers xx defective xxxxxxxx so xxxx was x case xx negligence xx terms xx proving xxxxxxxxx failed xx act xxxx reasonable xxxx or xxxxxxx precautionary xxxxxxxx under xxx following xxxxxxxx firstly xxxxxxxxx owed xxx duty xx its xxxxxx customers xx serves xxx hot xxxxx safe xxxxxxxxxxxx in x drive xxxxxxx secondly xxxxxxxxx had xxxxxxxx their xxxxxxxx duty xx evading xxx safety xxxxxxx since xxx coffee xxx extremely xxx Cain xxxxx in xxxxx of xxxxxxxxx McDonalds xxxxxx of xxxx led xx Lieback xxxxxxxxx third-degree xxxxx fourth xxxxxxx incurred xxxxxxxxxxx medical xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx injuries xxxx Lieback's xxxxxxxx argument xxx McDonalds xxxxxxxxx they xxxxxx that xxx unsafe xxxxxxxxxxx of xxxxxx being xxxxxx than xxxxxxxxxxx coffee xxxxxxxxxxx at x F xxx coffee xxx the xxxxxxxxx to xxxxx third-degree xxxxx in xxxx than xxx seconds xx the xxxxx they xxxx relied xx previous xxxxxxxxx complaints xxxxx were xxxx regarding xxxxxxxx temperature xxx casing xxxxx but xxxx did xxx comply xxxx consumer xxxxxx to xxxxx the xxxxxxxxxxx or xxxxxxx the xxxx of xxxxxxx third-degree xxxxx publicly xxxx Although xx can xx understood xxxx a xxxxxx circumstance xxx drink xxxxx is xxxxxx F xx more xx unreasonable xx drink xxx varied xxxxxxxx preferences xxxxxxx towards xxxxxxx a xxxxx hotter xxxx usual xxx in xxxxxxxxxxxx not xx an xxxxxx it xxxxx cause xxxxxxxxxxxx burns xxxxxxx the xxxx ruled xx favour xx Stella xxxxxxx by xxxxxxxx her xx compensatory xxxxxx which xxx later xxxxxxx to xxx to xxxxxxx owing xxxxxxx responsibility xxx by xxx judge xxxxxxx to x total xxxxxxxxxxxx amounting xx Cain xxx jury xxxxxx on xxxx of xxx following xxxxxxx to xxxx the xxxxxxxx firstly xxxxx negligence xx McDonalds xxxxxxx assessing xxx possibility xx serving xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx coffee xxxx after xxxxxxxxx hundreds xx complaints xxxxxxxx deterrence xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxx damages xxxx compensated xx set xx example xxxx negligence xx safety xxxxx not xx tolerated xxxxx failure xx address xxx risk xx a xxxxxx manner xxxxxxx meaningful xxxxxx even xxxxx prior xxxxxxxxx influenced xxx jury's xxxxxxxx to xxxxxx a xxxxxxxxxxx punitive xxxxx References xxxx K x The xxxxxxxxx coffee xxxxxxx Journal xx Consumer xxx Commercial xxx -More Articles From Business Management
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
