Product Liability: How It Turned Strict

There is a commonly held misconception in the food industry-one that we run into quite a lot when attending trade shows and other industry-sponsored conferences to give presentations on the law of product liability. That misconception is that liability for a product-related injury requires proof of negligence. That is, if I, as a person injured by a product, am going to hold you, its manufacturer, liable, I must be able to present evidence the product was defective because you failed to use reasonable care in making it. And if I cannot come up with such evidence, or if you can prove you acted as carefully as possible, you cannot be sued for damages, at least not successfully. This is, however, wishful thinking, legally-speaking.

Members help make our journalism possible. Become a Restaurant Business member today and unlock exclusive benefits, including unlimited access to all of our content. Sign up here.

Multimedia

Exclusive Content

Financing

Why are so many restaurant chains filing for bankruptcy?

The Bottom Line: A combination of rising costs and weakening sales, and more expensive debt, has caused real problems for restaurant chains. But the industry is also really difficult.

Financing

Despite their complaints, customers keep flocking to Chipotle

The Bottom Line: The chain continued to be a juggernaut last quarter, with strong sales and traffic growth, despite frequent social media complaints about shrinkflation or other challenges.

Operations

Hitting resistance elsewhere, ghost kitchens and virtual concepts find a happy home in family dining

Reality Check: Old-guard chains are finding the alternative operations to be persistently effective side hustles.

Trending

More from our partners

The manufacturer is liable to the injured person without regard to whether there is evidence of negligence or fault.