Effective Communication of Warnings in the Workplace: Avoiding Injuries in Working with Industrial Materials. Effective Communication of Warnings in the Workplace: Avoiding Injuries in Working with Industrial Materials.

Effective Communication of Warnings in the Workplace: Avoiding Injuries in Working with Industrial Materials‪.‬

Missouri Law Review 2008, Wntr, 73, 1

    • £2.99
    • £2.99

Publisher Description

I. INTRODUCTION A principal purpose of product liability is to provide incentives for increasing product safety and better informing consumers, workers, and other end-users so that they may avoid potential hazards. To meet this goal, the law generally places liability on the entity best able to prevent the potential harm posed by a product. (1) Product warnings offer a relatively low cost means of informing the product's user of potential hazards--in effect, recasting the user as the least-cost avoider of injury. (2) Because there may be many risks associated with a product's use, some more probable or more serious than others, and because users have limits on what they will read and remember, sound product liability law delicately balances the practicality and comprehensiveness of warnings. This balance furthers the overriding policy objective of preventing harm to the product's user. It also indicates who should bear responsibility for communicating warnings. (3) In many instances, the product liability system appropriately and efficiently allocates liability; however, sometimes it proves ineffective in cases involving industrial materials, such as chemicals, metals, sand or plastics, which can have numerous uses in the workplace and are incorporated into various products. Courts, in some instances, have held manufacturers and suppliers of such raw materials liable for warning end-users to the same degree as manufacturers of consumer products. (4) This has occurred despite considerable differences in the ability of these manufacturers and suppliers to effectively warn end-users.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
2008
1 January
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
76
Pages
PUBLISHER
University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law
SIZE
368.2
KB

More Books Like This

PRODUCT LAUNCH 360° PRODUCT LAUNCH 360°
2020
Patent Holdup, Patent Remedies, And Antitrust Responses. Patent Holdup, Patent Remedies, And Antitrust Responses.
2009
Nanotechnology Law : Best Practices Nanotechnology Law : Best Practices
2012
Healthcare Antitrust, Settlements, and the Federal Trade Commission Healthcare Antitrust, Settlements, and the Federal Trade Commission
2018
Patent Practice in Japan and Europe : Liber Amicorum for Guntram Rahn Patent Practice in Japan and Europe : Liber Amicorum for Guntram Rahn
2011
IP and Antitrust : The Competition Policies of Intellectual Property in Eighty Cases IP and Antitrust : The Competition Policies of Intellectual Property in Eighty Cases
2015

More Books by Missouri Law Review

Risks and Realities of Mezzanine Loans (Symposium: A Festschrift in Honor of Dale A. Whitman) Risks and Realities of Mezzanine Loans (Symposium: A Festschrift in Honor of Dale A. Whitman)
2007
Less is More: Decluttering the State Action Doctrine. Less is More: Decluttering the State Action Doctrine.
2008
Tesla, Marconi, And the Great Radio Controversy: Awarding Patent Damages Without Chilling a Defendant's Incentive to Innovate (Great Inventor Nikola Tesla) Tesla, Marconi, And the Great Radio Controversy: Awarding Patent Damages Without Chilling a Defendant's Incentive to Innovate (Great Inventor Nikola Tesla)
2008
Federalism and International Law Through the Lens of Legal Pluralism. Federalism and International Law Through the Lens of Legal Pluralism.
2008
The Hundred-Years war: The Ongoing Battle Between Courts and Agencies over the Right to Interpret Federal Law. The Hundred-Years war: The Ongoing Battle Between Courts and Agencies over the Right to Interpret Federal Law.
2009
There But for the Grace of God Go I: the Right of Cross-Examination in Social Security Disability Hearings. There But for the Grace of God Go I: the Right of Cross-Examination in Social Security Disability Hearings.
2009