خلاصة:
Assembled goods are goods that are made by assembling prefabricated parts. If damage is caused by the assembled product, the injured party usually files a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the final product due to easier access. The defendant may argue that he relied on actions or omissions of component manufacturers or raw material suppliers to exemption from liability in this research, we answer the question that on which basis is the producer of the part is responsible to the injured party? In order to answer this question, the legal system of the United States has been studied first, and by extracting the model of this legal system based on the judicial procedure, the issue has been discussed in Iran legal system. Finally, it was concluded that in the American legal system, the general principle is that if the manufactured part is non-defective before distribution, the part manufacturer is not responsible. However, in exceptional cases, the component maker is responsible for compensation to the injured party, and for these cases, four models have been followed by the courts of this country. In Iran's legal system, inspired by the model obtained from the American legal system, the manufacturer of the part is responsible in case the component is defective and there is a certain causal relationship between the defect and the occurrence of damage, in contrast in cases of design defects and or issuance of warning by the component manufacturer, the responsibility of the part manufacturer is assumed.
ملخص الجهاز:
If an assembled good causes damage, the injured party usually initiates a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the final product due to easier access; however, it must be examined whether the defendant can rely on the act or omission of component manufacturers or raw material suppliers to be exempted from liability.
Now, if the final or assembled product causes damage, determining the boundary between the liability of the final goods manufacturer and the liability of the component and raw material supplier towards the consumer is one of the very important topics in the field of civil liability; because detecting a defect in the final product to impose the resulting liability is sufficiently difficult, and when the discussion turns to the defects of the constituent parts and components as well, ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ 1- Moin Dictionary, available at: / https://abadis.
In this case, the decision of the majority of the California Supreme Court was based on the theory of negligence; however, Judge Roger Traynor 3 argued, based on four reasons: 1- efficient compensation, 2- efficient deterrence, 3- existing negligence, and 4- consumer expectations, that the liability of the manufacturer of a defective product should be strict.
In the American legal system, although there is a tendency toward strict liability regarding liability arising from product defects, the courts of this country consider the possibility of filing a compensation lawsuit based on strict liability against component manufacturers to be a fundamental danger.
(
, 
, 
)
