Caswell bought a gas grill to give to his friend, Kile, as a birthday present. The grill exploded the first time it was used due to a factoy defect, and Kile was injured. The manufacturer of the grill argued that it was not responsible for Kile’s injuries because Kile had not purchased the grill.
I have already completed the below case study. I just need three in text (APA) citations added.
Case Study: Caswell bought a gas grill to give to his friend, Kile, as a birthday present. The grill exploded the first time it was used due to a factoy defect, and Kile was injured. The manufacturer of the grill argued that it was not responsible for Kile’s injuries because Kile had not purchased the grill. There was no privity of contract between Kile and the manufacturer. How would you decide?
My completed assignment:
This case is based on the legal theory of privity of contract, which states that only the original parties to a contract can enforce its terms and sue for breach of contract. Nonetheless, the law has changed, and specific procedures have been put in place to assist persons who have been harmed by a faulty product but had nothing to do with the initial contract. According to the product responsibility concept, a manufacturer can be held liable for harm caused by a faulty product even if there is no direct contract between the maker and the person who was harmed. When it comes to machines that are actively harmful, such as gas grills, the courts have ruled that public safety is more important than strictly adhering to the norms of privity of contract.
Whether the individual who uses the item paid full price for it or received it as a gift, the corporation that manufactured it owes that person some responsibility. The fact that the grill broke when it was used for the first time established a compelling case of product liability. This was due to a fault in the manufacturing process. Kile’s injuries should be laid on the creator, who oversaw creating the grill, assembling it, and ensuring its quality. It’s also vital to consider how likely something is to occur. Manufacturers must presume that their products will be used by persons other than those for whom they were designed. As a result, they must ensure that the items they sell may be utilized safely by anyone who picks them up.
Because of product liability and predictability concerns, it is critical to rule in favor of Kile. Even though no contract existed between the manufacturer and Kile, the manufacturer should be held liable for the injuries caused by the damaged gas grill. Kile is entitled to compensation for his injuries and losses because he was the last person to utilize the product and received an expected benefit. This issue demonstrates why the manufacturing industry must realize its broader social and ethical duties. By maintaining product responsibility standards, we can ensure that consumers who are injured by faulty goods do not have their cases dismissed due to a technicality such as privity of contract. If public trust and product safety are to be maintained, manufacturers must be held accountable for the safety of their products, regardless of who buys them.
Requirements: N/A
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
