Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
explosives in a populated area, or from sale and use of a product with a
defective component or erroneous instruction for its safe use.
Nuisance theory requires that the plaintiff prove that the defendant
conducted an unreasonable activity on its property that has interfered
with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his or her property or dam-
aged the property. This is a particularly troublesome theory for a court
to apply because of the potential breadth of its application. Thus, courts
often balance various factors such as the likelihood and severity of the
harm, the societal value of the activity, and specific contextual consid-
erations. Cases have involved, for example, keeping livestock on one's
property in an urban environment, or operating a facility that discharges
noxious odors or pollutants into the community.
Plaintiffs have recently sought to have courts extend Nuisance theory
to hold a product manufacturer liable for the damages arising from use of
the product by the manufacturer's customers, as in cases against the mak-
ers of lead paint products and GM seed, with some courts holding that
Nuisance is an appropriate theory where it can be shown that the manu-
facturer was substantially involved in the downstream, harm-causing use
of their product by another party. This illustrates the extraordinary flexi-
bility of common law principles when interpreted and applied by activist
judges.
As this brief survey indicates, common law provides a plaintiff with
several options for securing remedies that can be costly and even finan-
cially ruinous for a defendant company, especially when the company
causes a major accident or sells a product that harms many persons. The
defendant's losses often extend far beyond the liability for damages that
may be imposed by the courts, and include injunctions against its fur-
ther conduct of the activity or sale of the product, recalls of the product,
restoration of the area contaminated by the incident, adverse publicity,
loss of customers and investors, and the prompting of regulatory inter-
ventions and penalties, for example.
Common law therefore has the clear potential to make companies
more attentive to the safety of their activities and products, and to
Search WWH ::




Custom Search