The concept of strict product liability is addressed in “Product Liability: How It Turned Strict,” one of a series of articles for ID Access that address the legal risks faced by manufacturers and food distributors: “Under the new rule of strict liability, to hold a manufacturer liable, a person injured while using a product need only show that: (1) the product was defective; (2) it was used as intended; and (3) the defect caused the injury. The care used in the manufacture of the product is irrelevant to the determination of liability. The only issue in a product liability case is the defectiveness of the product, not the manufacturer’s conduct in somehow allowing the defect to arise. As a result, proof of negligence is not required to recover damages.”
Denis Stearns, is of-counsel at Marler Clark, earned a BA in philosophy from Seattle University, and his law degree from the University of Wisconsin at Madison. He graduated from both schools with high honors, and won numerous awards for service and
Oregon State University has launched a new online Quality and Food Safety training series aimed at building practical skills for professionals across the food industry.
The program, offered through OSU’
Paper-based records and Excel spreadsheets still play a large role in managing staff training, according to a survey.
The ninth global food safety training survey involved Campden BRI, BRCGS, IFS,
Hilton Foods has disclosed costs of £28 million ($37 million) as part of an incident involving a recall of fish in the United States because of Listeria.
The inventory write-off
European Union reference laboratories focused on bacteria, parasites and viruses have started work.
Beginning this month, the three labs for foodborne and waterborne diseases officially began operations.
OPINION
In an article that will soon be published in the Seattle Law Review, I take a look at food safety through the lens of the “pink slime” controversy and
“Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, Or what’s a heaven for?”
— from Robert Browning’s “Andrea del Sarto”
Part 2: Does case law support FDA’
