scholarly journals Liability claims in Spain post-COVID-19: A predictable scenario

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 101745
Author(s):  
C. Martin-Fumadó ◽  
E.L. Gómez-Durán ◽  
J. Benet-Travé ◽  
E. Barbería-Marcalain ◽  
J. Arimany-Manso
Keyword(s):  
Liability Claims

scholarly journals Ongoing downplaying of the carcinogenicity of chrysotile asbestos by vested interests

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xaver Baur ◽  
Arthur L. Frank
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Industry ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Chrysotile Asbestos ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Adverse Health Effects ◽  
Mining Companies ◽  
Public Media ◽  
Overwhelming Evidence ◽  
Vested Interests ◽  
Liability Claims

AbstractIndustries that mine, manufacture and sell asbestos or asbestos-containing products have a long tradition of promoting the use of asbestos, while placing the burden of economic and health costs on workers and society. This has been successfully done in recent years and decades in spite of the overwhelming evidence that all asbestos types are carcinogenic and cause asbestosis. In doing so, the asbestos industry has undermined the WHO campaign to reach a worldwide ban of asbestos and to eliminate asbestos-related diseases. Even worse, in recent years they succeeded in continuing asbestos mining and consuming in the range of about 1.3 million tons annually. Nowadays, production takes place predominantly in Russia, Kazakhstan and China. Chrysotile is the only asbestos type still sold and represents 95% of asbestos traded over the last century.The asbestos industry, especially its PR agency, the International Chrysotile Association, ICA, financed by asbestos mining companies in Russia, Kazakhstan and Zimbabwe and asbestos industrialists in India and Mexico, continues to be extremely active by using slogans such as chrysotile can be used safely.Another approach of the asbestos industry and of some of its insurance agencies is to broadly defeat liability claims of asbestos victims.In doing so they systematically use inappropriate science produced by their own and/or by industry-affiliated researchers. Some of the latter were also engaged in producing defense material for other industries including the tobacco industry. Frequent examples of distributing such disinformation include questioning or denying established scientific knowledge about adverse health effects of asbestos. False evidence continues to be published in scientific journals and books.The persisting strong influence of vested asbestos-related interests in workers and public health issues including regulations and compensation necessitate ongoing alertness, corrections and appropriate reactions in scientific as well as public media and policy advisory bodies.

scholarly journals DUTIES AND LIABILITIES IN PRIVATE LAW

Legal Theory ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-156
Author(s):  
Peter Jaffey
Keyword(s):  
Strict Liability ◽  
Corrective Justice ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Liability Claims

Private law is generally formulated in terms of right–duty relations, and accordingly, private-law claims are understood to arise from breaches of duty, or wrongs. Some claims are not easy to explain on this basis because the claim arises from an act that the defendant was justified in doing. The violation/infringement distinction seems to offer an explanation of such claims, but it is argued that the explanation is illusory. Claims of this sort are best understood as based not on a primary right–duty relation at all but on a “primary liability” or “right–liability” relation. A primary-liability claim is not a claim arising from the breach of a strict-liability duty. The recognition of primary-liability claims does not involve skepticism about duties or rules or legal relations and it is consistent with the analysis of private law in terms of corrective justice.

Clinical safety and professional liability claims in Ophthalmology

2017 ◽  
Vol 92 (11) ◽  
pp. 528-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Dolz-Güerri ◽  
E.L. Gómez-Durán ◽  
A. Martínez-Palmer ◽  
M. Castilla Céspedes ◽  
J. Arimany-Manso
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Safety ◽  
Professional Liability ◽  
Liability Claims

Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.: The Function of State of the Art Evidence in Strict Products Liability

1984 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Berman
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
The State ◽  
Health Hazards ◽  
Products Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Liability Claims

AbstractIn Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a state of the art defense is unavailable in cases brought under a theory of strict liability for failure to warn. The court indicated that asbestos producers may be held liable for their products' harms even if the health hazards of asbestos were unknown and not discoverable when the products were marketed. In a subsequent case, the New Jersey court held that state of the art evidence is relevant to whether a product is defective. This Case Comment examines these different uses of knowledge evidence in the disposition of products liability cases. It contends that manufacturers should not be held liable for unknowable risks. The Comment concludes that the state of the art defense establishes a logical limit on strict liability and promotes efficient resolution of products liability claims.

Staatsklimahaftung

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabell Böhm
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
State Liability ◽  
Liability Claims ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Made In

Climate change litigation is becoming increasingly important. This thesis deals with the question whether state liability claims against Germany or the EU can be justified, if commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are not met. For this purpose, the claim under public liability according to § 839 German Civil Code in connection with Art. 34 German Basic Law, the liability of the EU-Member States and the liability of the European Union according to Art. 340 II TFEU are discussed. At the end of the thesis, considerations on the practical perspectives of state liability are made in order to improve their prospects of success.

scholarly journals Forensic Engineering Investigations Of Product Liability Cases

2008 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard M. Ziernicki ◽  
Railsback Benjamin T.
Keyword(s):  
Product Liability ◽  
Safety Engineering ◽  
General Methodology ◽  
Forensic Engineering ◽  
Liability Claims ◽  
Physical Principles

Engineers Are Regularly Retained To Perform Investigations To Determine Whether Or Not A Product Is Defective And Liable For Injuries Sustained By An Individual Or Damages By A Commercial Entity. While Engineers Are Trained To Solve Problems Based On Physical Principles, Little Training Is Given To The Graduate Engineer To Determine Whether A Product Is Defective Or Not. Since The Majority Of Product Liability Actions Result From An Injury Sustained By An Individual Using A Product, The Engineer Is Ultimately Evaluating The Safety Of The Product. The Authors Of This Paper Will Detail A General Methodology To Investigate Product Liability Claims Through The Use Of Safety Engineering Principles.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document