Comparative Study Of Strict Product Liability Between China And America

As the core of modern product liability system, the principle of strict product liability has initiated a revolution in the field of product liability in the world and have become, just in several decades, the main principle of world product liability legislation since the establishment in 1965.America, the birthplace of this principles, has already established the comparatively perfect system of strict product liability. But China starts relatively late with respect to the special legislation on product liability, with 'Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China' as the beginning, and the provisions related to strict product liability are less than perfect. Therefore, this paper, by analyzing strict product liability in terms of product scope, defect of product and compensation for damage between China and America, points out the disadvantages in the current system in China and proposes some suggestions for improvement, in the hope of making some contribution to improving the product liability system in China.Part one is the general introduction to strict product liability. This part analyzes the theoretical basis and constitutive elements of strict product liability by briefly introducing the concept and history of it and makes a simple comparison of the current legislation on strict product liability between China and America.Part two is the comparison of regulations of product between China and America. Starting from the definition and scope of product, this part compares the regulations in China with that in America and further analyzes their own features. The key in this part is how to improve the regulations of product in China and the corresponding measures include: to make more scientific regulations of product in Chinese legislation; to demonstrate the necessity and urgency of bringing 'electricity' 'initial agricultural products' and 'blood products' into products by discussing the characters of them in detail and comparing the social and economic development condition of China with that of America.Part three is concerned with comparing the provisions for 'defect of product' between China and America. In this part, the author expounds the advantages of legislation on 'defect of product' in America and the identification standard of it in China by making a comparison of regulations on it between the two countries and points out that there are problems that remain to be solved in defining 'defect of product' in China and the country should abandon the double standard of its identification and use 'unreasonable danger' as the only standard.Part four is the comparison of provisions for compensation for damage between China and America. In this part, by comparing the regulations between the two countries, the author firstly analyzes the difference in compensation for spiritual damage and the reason behind it and proposes the suggestion that the upper and lower limit of compensation for spiritual damage should be set. By comparing the rules in compensation for punitive damages, the paper points out our flaws in deciding its applicable scope and compensation amount, and puts forward some relevant suggestions by using American experience for reference.