General Motors (the defendant) installed the damaged ignition switches to the significant number of their cars, which have been produced for several years (Spector, 2009). Consequently, many car owners died in the car accidents due to the inability to control the car. In this instance, many complained by the injured (the plaintiff) were filled to compensate the damage and other means. In the end, the majority of the cases were affirmed for plaintiff due to the inability of the defendant to comply with the product liability law.
As for the issues, the primary aspect lays in the necessity of the defendant to reduce the existing damage, which has been caused to the plaintiff due to the inability of the defendant to assure the quality of the products. Nonetheless, the primary goal of the plaintiff is to compensate the damage by providing financial support to cover the medical and other types of costs. Lastly, it remains evident that the defendant will try to minimize the costs. In the end, finding the balance between these parties and justifying the amount of compensation are the critical issues, which are faced by the judge.
The principles of the product liability law are the primary foundation for the lawsuit. In this instance, it remains evident that the product liability can be explained as “the liability of any or all parties along the chain of manufacture of any product for damage caused by that product” (Legal information institute: Products liability, 2014). It remains evident that the company has to compensate the damage in case of any consequences, which are mentioned in the definition above. Nonetheless, the compliance with the principles of this law lays in the fundamentals of this case due to the essentiality of this aspect in the modern world.
As for the analysis of the decision of the judge, it remains evident that it is rather logical. In this instance, all of the attributes of the case state its correlation with the product liability law. In this instance, the judge clearly identified that the violation of the customer’s safety took place and caused significant physical and moral damage to the users of the cars. Nonetheless, some of the lawsuits claim that other laws are regulations were also violated. However, in the end, it remains evident that it will require evidence and a significant amount of resources to verify the presence of other violations.
As for the application of this case and its influence on the business law, it remains evident that the companies have a tendency to pay higher attention to the quality control to avoid the potential issues with the product liability law. Nowadays, quality control is an essential attribute of the company’s success in various industries including pharmacology (Eggertson, 2013). Additionally, it encourages the cultivation of the essentiality of the principles of the total quality management, as these approaches help improve the quality of the products, avoid lawsuits, and minimize costs. Furthermore, the presence of the product liability law has a beneficial effect on the society, as any member can justify any complaints if any of the rights related to the product quality will be violated.
References
Anderson, M. (2013). Emails (and other pure information) are not property. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 8(5), 357-358.
Eggertson, L. (2013). Quality control. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 185(10), 467.
Halbert, T., & Ingulli, E. (2012). Law and ethics in the business environment. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Holtzhausen, L., & Fourie, L. (2009). Employees’ perceptions of company values and objectives and employer-employee relationships: Theoretical model. Corporate Communications, 14(3), 333-344.
Legal information institute: First Amendment. (2014). Web.
Legal information institute: Products liability. (2014). Web.
Spector, M. (2009). GM broadens product-liability pact. The Wall Street Journal. Eastern Edition, p. B2.