PRV3 200 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Private Law
Document Summary
Response (not property damage) recovery for pel in tort physical injury property damage. For the same reason that ni the us we have strict liability for products, we should adopt that. The mistake made by wilberforce is anns is that if we need to name the damage, it is. Svp back - courts are trying to deal with what to do with anns, in australia, uk, and with builder liability in situations where buildings are dangerously constructed what is the appropriate. Pel situation depending on how we talk about the facts, that it is something closer to. Stychin and scc say that this is wrong it is economic loss that is tied to the danger of injury. East rover steamship case dismiss tort claims for pel for danger and misrep same logic here for dangerous constructions rather than saying that this is for contract and statute to deal with (ex. The australia brookfield case statute will protect consumers)