scholarly journals Platform Economy and Product Liability: Old Rules for New Markets

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomás García-Micó
Keyword(s):  
Product Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Third Party ◽  
New Markets ◽  
Liability Law ◽  
Online Marketplaces ◽  
Platform Economy

According to statistics, Amazon is one of the most-used online marketplaces worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing lockdowns to reduce the spread of the virus have shown how critical online marketplaces are to enable e-commerce and keep commercial transactions alive, especially in such times when regular commerce is disrupted. However, when we buy online, we have no chance of examining whether the product works or whether it is defective. If something goes wrong when we buy a product from a third-party seller through Amazon, as consumers, we then face the challenge of trying to file a claim for the damages that might have arisen due to the defectiveness of the product. This article explores Amazon’s position in this scenario, with reference to the case law from both US and EU courts and regulations, not solely from the point of view of Product Liability Law, but also according to the E-Commerce Directive liability.

Product Liability

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fairgrieve Duncan ◽  
Richard Goldberg
Keyword(s):  
Strict Liability ◽  
Product Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Financial Loss ◽  
Liability Law ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Product Liability is a recognised authority in the field and covers the product liability laws through which manufacturers, retailers, and others may be held liable to compensate persons who are injured, or who incur financial loss, when the products which they manufacture or sell are defective or not fit for their purpose. Product defects may originate in the production process, be one of design, or be grounded in a failure to issue an adequate warning or directions for safe use and practitioners advising business clients or claimants will find this book provides all the necessary information for practitioners to manage a product liability claim. This new edition has been fully updated to take account of 10 years of development in case law and regulation, and the increasing impact of cross-border and transnational sale of goods. The Court of Justice of the European Union handed down major rulings concerning the Product Liability Directive which affect the application of the Directive and national arrangements and Fairgrieve and Goldberg examines this in detail. For any legal practitioner operating in areas which require knowledge of European product liability law, an understanding of the impact of recent developments is essential and this work is an essential resource for practitioners working on product liability, sale of goods, personal injury and negligence. The work provides comprehensive coverage of the law of negligence as it applies to product liability, of the strict liability provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1987, and of the EU's Product Liability Directive on which the Act is based. Although the majority of cases involve pharmaceuticals and medical devices, in recent English cases the allegedly defective products have been as diverse as a child's buggy, an All Terrain Vehicle, and even a coffee cup. Many cases are brought as group actions, and the book examines the rights of those who are injured by defective products. As well as considering the perspective of the law as it has developed in the UK, this edition contains detailed discussion of case law from other jurisdictions including the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France and Germany. The coverage in the work is complemented by a full analysis of issues which arise in transnational litigation involving problems of jurisdiction and the choice of laws.

On Behavioural Asymmetry in Product Liability Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-64
Author(s):  
Thomas Verheyen
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Product Liability ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
European Law ◽  
Consumer Expectations ◽  
Liability Law ◽  
The Asymmetry ◽  
New Criterion

Abstract This theoretical article identifies the asymmetry between the producer and the consumer as the key to understanding product liability law. In an attempt to resolve the endless scholarly and jurisprudential debates on the proper criterion for defectiveness in European law, it first tracks the ways in which the commonly opposed consumer expectations and risk-utility test each fail to address the typical asymmetries between producers and consumers in a satisfying manner. Building upon the concept of ‘behavioural asymmetry’, it then develops a new criterion for defectiveness under European law: the behavioural risk-utility test. Under a behavioural risk-utility test, the producer is liable if the product is not reasonably safe for average users suffering from cognitive biases and other behavioural shortcomings. This test aptly combines the systemic point of view of risk-utility balancing with an evidence-based conception of asymmetry, and therefore provides a meaningful criterion for adjudicating product liability disputes.

scholarly journals View at the Partner’s Transfer of the Stake and its Restrictions

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-140
Author(s):  
Adriána Palajová
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Commercial Code ◽  
Commercial Company ◽  
Material Conditions ◽  
Business Share

Abstract This article deals with the transfer of stake in a general commercial company and the transfer of business share in a limited liability company especially according to Slovak legislation and also according to older and current Czech legislation. The attention is focused on the regulation of these transfers and the relations that are generated on the basis of author´s point of view and case law. The question of the admissibility and prohibition of the transfer of stake is presented in general commercial company. Analysis of the issue focuses mainly on the formal and material conditions of transfer of business share in limited liability company with differentiation on another member and on third party. Special attention is paid to the consent to that transfer granted by the general meeting or by other body of limited liability company and also is paid to the legal consequences that arise in the case of withholding of consent. The authoress seeks to point at the shortcomings of assessed legal arrangement and provides possible legislative solutions of transfer of stake or business share within the dispositive provisions of the Slovak Commercial Code.

scholarly journals Le fiduciaire doit-il désintéresser les tiers créanciers privilégiés?

2005 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 897-915
Author(s):  
Robert Demers
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Interesting Point ◽  
Controversial Subject

What, if any, are the trustee for bondholder's obligations when proceeding with the sale of a debtor's property ? Section 30 of the Special Corporate Powers Act is silent on the question of third party creditors in such a situation. Must we necessarily conclude for that reason that the trustee is not obliged to disinterest privileged claims ranking above his according to the rule of C.C. article 1994 ? This paper deals with this controversial subject. More than seventy years of provincial case-law has affirmed this duty while not being very precise as to its foundation. The general principles of civil law perhaps can indicate what would be the explanation for such a rule while giving an interesting point of view on what constitutes a privilege.

Formation of Contract and Third Parties in Cambodia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Formal Requirements

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties in Japan

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masami Okino
Keyword(s):  
Case Analysis ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
German Model ◽  
Recent Debate ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the law on third party beneficiaries in Japan; mostly characterized by adherence to the German model that still bears an imprint on Japanese contract law. Thus, there is neither a doctrine of consideration nor any other justification for a general doctrine of privity, and contracts for the benefit of third parties are generally enforceable as a matter of course. Whether an enforceable right on the part of a third party is created is simply a matter of interpretation of the contract which is always made on a case-by-case analysis but there are a number of typical scenarios where the courts normally find the existence (or non-existence) of a contract for the benefit of a third party. In the recent debate on reform of Japanese contract law, wide-ranging suggestions were made for revision of the provisions on contracts for the benefit of third parties in the Japanese Civil Code. However, it turned out that reform in this area was confined to a very limited codification of established case law.

scholarly journals The Principle of Directive-Compliant Development of the Law and the Contra Legem Limit

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-488
Author(s):  
Thomas M.J. Möllers
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Broad Term ◽  
Legal Texts ◽  
Classical Methodology ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Methodology ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Further Development ◽  
Domestic Law

AbstractThe Europeanisation of domestic law calls for a classical methodology to ‘update’ the established traditions of the law. The relationship between European directives and national law is difficult, since directives do apply, but European legal texts need to be implemented into national law. Whilst directives are not binding on private individuals, there is no direct third-party effect, but only an ‘indirect effect’. This effect is influenced by the stipulations of the ECJ, but is ultimately determined in accordance with methodical principles of national law. The ECJ uses a broad term of interpretation of the law. In contrast, in German and Austrian legal methodology the wording of a provision defines the dividing line between interpretation and further development of the law. The article reveals how legal scholars and the case-law have gradually shown in recent decades a greater willingness to shift from a narrow, traditional boundary of permissible development of the law to a modern line of case-law regarding the boundary of directive-compliant, permissible development of the law.

scholarly journals Creation of Technical Conditions for Use or Infringement – The Meanders of the Warehouse Keeper’s Liability in Light of CJEU Judgment C-567/18 Coty Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-282
Author(s):  
Krystyna Szczepanowska-Kozłowska
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Literal Meaning ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Industrial Property ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Law ◽  
Trademark Use

AbstractOne form of industrial property right infringement is stocking for the purpose of offering or marketing. This form of infringement appears both in EU legal acts on trademarks or designs, as well as in national regulations, including those concerning patents. What is specific to stocking when compared to other activities comprising the stipulated exclusivity of the holder of industrial property rights is the fact that the literal meaning of “stocking” does not explain whether the infringing party or the warehouse keeper is the entity that places the goods in storage. The structure of industrial property rights as absolute rights would theoretically permit the view that the law is violated by both the entity that accepts the goods for storage and the entity that places such goods in storage. To determine if there is an infringement, it must be established what the goods being stocked are further intended for. It is not without significance that the finding of an infringement of industrial property rights does not depend on fault or awareness. From the point of view of the industrial property law regime, it is difficult to find arguments against this understanding of infringement by stocking. Since the offeror of goods infringing industrial property rights may be held liable even if the goods have not yet been manufactured, it is conceivable that the entity accepting such goods for stocking is also liable. This interpretation of the concept of stocking would certainly correspond to the absolute nature of liability for infringement.In a recent judgment the CJEU confirmed that the warehouse keeper who, on behalf of a third party, stores goods which infringe trademark rights only creates the technical conditions for trademark use by this third party provided that the warehouse keeper is not aware of that infringement. The CJEU also confirmed that only the person who decides about the purpose of storing the goods can be treated as an infringer. However, the CJEU did not respond to the question regarding whether the warehouse keeper could be treated as an infringer if it pursues the aims of storing the goods at the request of the entity that put the goods into storage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document