Article
Licensed
Unlicensed
Requires Authentication
Is MacPherson A Legacy of Civilian Views?
-
Franz Werro
and
Claudia Hasbun
Published/Copyright:
June 9, 2016
Abstract
MacPherson liberated the common law of negligence in the United States from its traditional constraints and helped better protect victims of defective products regardless of privity of contract. It made its way to other common law jurisdictions—United Kingdom and Australia—where the same result was achieved. MacPherson, however, never made its way to the civil law world—France and Germany—because these jurisdictions did not need it, given that privity of contract was never an obstacle there. The courts upheld products liability suits in the late nineteenth century on the basis of presumed negligence or even strict liability, thus going even beyond what MacPherson achieved.
Keywords: products liability; privity of contract; negligence; strict liability; contractual liability; defective product
Published Online: 2016-6-9
Published in Print: 2016-8-1
©2016 by De Gruyter
You are currently not able to access this content.
You are currently not able to access this content.
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Editor’s Introduction to the Symposium “MacPherson at 100: Reflections On Its Influence”
- The Reciprocal of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company
- Ives and MacPherson: Judicial Process in the Regulatory State
- Is MacPherson A Legacy of Civilian Views?
- The Myths of MacPherson
Keywords for this article
products liability;
privity of contract;
negligence;
strict liability;
contractual liability;
defective product
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Editor’s Introduction to the Symposium “MacPherson at 100: Reflections On Its Influence”
- The Reciprocal of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company
- Ives and MacPherson: Judicial Process in the Regulatory State
- Is MacPherson A Legacy of Civilian Views?
- The Myths of MacPherson
