Your Company, a Manufacturer of Household Cleaning Products, Successfully Defended

Multiple Choice

Your company, a manufacturer of household cleaning products, successfully defended a product liability suit brought by a customer for a serious skin irritation she suffered after using an oven cleaning solution made by your company. Your defence was based on the fact that adequate warnings were placed on the container that users should wear gloves. The plaintiff has appealed the court's decision on the basis that the judge failed to apply the legal principle of strict liability to this case, which would automatically find the manufacturer liable if the product itself were, in fact, found to be inherently dangerous. Select the most appropriate statement from the following:

A) The Court of Appeal may find that the trial judge did not assess the inherent dangerousness of the cleaner sufficiently and order a new trial to assess this point.
B) The Court of Appeal may find that the trial judge did not assess the inherent dangerousness of the cleaner sufficiently and admit the appeal and reverse the decision.
C) The Court of Appeal may find that the trial judge did not properly apply the principle of strict liability and admit the appeal and reverse the decision.
D) The Court of Appeal may find that the trial judge properly considered the principle of strict liability and dismiss the appeal and affirm the decision.
E) All of the findings are possible except that the Court of Appeal may not find that the trial judge did not assess the inherent dangerousness of the cleaner sufficiently and admit the appeal and reverse the decision.