Negligence rule

Under the negligence rule, injurers are liable for damages caused by their behavior only if they don t exercise due care, and victims are responsible for other damages. Under strict liability with contributory negligence, the opposite is true injurers are responsible for all damages unless the victims did not exercise due care. Under strict liability, injurers are responsible for all damages their products cause, period. 

In contrast, if technologically sophisticated products are subject to the negligence rule, several difficulties impede efficiency. First, courts must determine appropriate due-care levels for firms, a difficult matter in all situations but even harder when technical or engineering information is involved. Second, even if courts select an... 

Strict liability is efficient only when firms can do a great deal to reduce their product risks and consumers cannot. The negligence rule becomes more appropriate as consumer behavior increasingly affects damages, firm behavior decreasingly affects damages, and knowledge about products becomes more widespread. How do the facts about chemicals relate to such institutional demands ... 

The choice between liabilities also involves value choices about individual responsibility. Advocating no liability or the negligence rule is consistent with the belief that people individually should be responsible for thinking about their choices and risks and whether to insure against them. Advocating strict liability is consistent with different beliefs. 

The best mix of liability rules, information markets, and regulations varies across commodities even if efficiency is the only criterion. Because all are suboptimal in practice, the proper mix also depends on people s inefficiency preferences. Asserting that one values individual liberty eliminates only command-and-control regulation from the set of possibilities. Under the right circumstances, no liability, the negligence rule, strict liability, and strict liability with contributory negligence all promote individual liberty. On balance, 1 favor no liability or the negligence rule because 1 believe the adverse side effects of sfrict liability are too severe. 

Figures 3 and 4 show fugacity coefficients for two binary systems calculated with Equation (10b). Although the pressure is not large, deviations from ideality and from the Lewis rule are not negligible.

I.I. The Traditional Safety Engineering (TSE) View The traditional safety engineering view is the most commonly held of these models in the CPI (and most other industries). As discussed in Chapter 1, this view assumes that human error is primarily controllable by the individual, in that people can choose to behave safely or otherwise. Unsafe behavior is assumed to be due to carelessness, negligence, and to the deliberate breaking of operating rules and procedures designed to protect the individual and the system from known risks. 

An obvious solution would be to undervalue the work done, in order to avoid a claim from the client. The case of Lubenham Fidelities and Investment Co v. South Pembrokeshire District Council (1986) took care of any tendency to undervalue. In that case, the Court of Appeal ruled that the contractor might sue the architect in tort for any damages suffered by him because of the negligent valuation. 

Just as the saturated solubility of sugar in water is limited, so the solid solubility of element B in metal A may also be limited, or may even be so low as to be negligible, as for example with lead in iron or carbon in aluminium. There is extensive interstitial solid solubility only when the solvent metal is a transition element and when the diameter of the solute atoms is < 0 6 of the diameter of the solvent atom. The Hume-Rothery rules state that there is extensive substitutional solid solubility of B in >1 only if ... 

This modified density Is a more slowly varying function of x than the density. The domain of Interest, 0 < x < h, Is discretized uniformly and the trapezoidal rule Is used to evaluate the Integrals In Equations 8 and 9. This results In a system of nonlinear, coupled, algebraic equations for the nodal values of n and n. Newton s method Is used to solve for n and n simultaneously. The domain Is discretized finely enough so that the solution changes negligibly with further refinement. A mesh size of 0.05a was adopted In our calculations. 

The buffer equation, which is often called the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation, is used to calculate the equilibrium pH of a buffer solution directly from initial concentrations. The approximation is valid as long as the difference between initial concentrations and equilibrium concentrations is negligibly small. As a rule of thumb, the buffer equation can be applied when initial concentrations of H j4 and A differ by less than a factor of 10. Example provides an illustration of the use of the buffer equation. 

With a weak acid such as hydrochloric and p-toluenesulphonic acids, [H+X ] and [H+] are negligibly small compared with [HX], so that eqn. 4.66 becomes Chx = [HX] also as in acid solution [S ] from autoprotolysis of the solvent H2S can be neglected, the electroneutrality rule reduces to... 

Aside from the conventions mentioned for the cell choice, further rules have been developed to achieve standardized descriptions of crystal structures [36], They should be followed to assure a systematic and comparable documentation of the data and to facilitate the inclusion in databases. However, contraventions of the standards are rather frequent, not only from negligence or ignorance of the rules, but often for compelling reasons, for example when the relationships between different structures are to be pointed out. 

The phase-transition temperature, 7 , and the width of transition, A7j/2, were operationally defined based on EPR data, as shown in Figure 10.6a. As a rule, in the presence of polar carotenoids the phase transition broadens and shifts to lower temperatures (Subczynski et al. 1993, Wisniewska et al. 2006). The effects on Tm are the strongest for dipolar carotenoids, significantly weaker for monopolar carotenoids, and negligible for nonpolar carotenoids. The effects decrease with the increase of membrane thickness. Additionally, the difference between dipolar and monopolar carotenoids decreases for thicker membranes (Subczynski and Wisniewska 1998, Wisniewska et al. 2006). These effects for lutein, P-cryptoxanthin, and P-carotene are illustrated in Figure 10.6b... 

---