Your three (3) paper is an analysis of the Grim Shaw v. Ford Motor Company (page 94) and what ethical theory, or absence of ethical theory, led to the decision. You should consider the questions which follow the case on page 102 of the textbook in organizing your analysis. This paper is due May 2nd.
What “business ethic” or principle guided Ford Motor Co. in deciding not to undertake proper corrective measures? 为什么选择不去改正 In imposing punitive damages, what factors led to the court on finding that punitive damages were appropriate? 惩罚性赔偿 Under a managerial theory, what would each stakeholder argue in supporting or contesting Ford’s decision not to undertake the correction? 股东的争论 When the court assesses the appropriateness of the punitive damages they weigh “the degree of reprehensibility of defendant’s conduct, the wealth of the defendant, the amount of compensatory damages, and an amount which serve as a deterrent effect on like conduct by defendant and others who may be so inclined” what ethical philosophies guide such a determination and what philosophies would be contrary to the use of these factors? If you were in the position of leading Ford Motor Co, would you fix to the car? If so, how would you justify such an action to those shareholders who insist that you have a duty to maximize profits-especially if the “fix” would involve a major hit to the corporate “bottom line”? Do you believe Ford Motor Co and/or the individuals leading the company should be personally liable for the damages and, if so, what theory or philosophy would justify such a decision?
在产品责任案件中，很多生产商并不知道产品缺陷的存在，诉讼中一般要求原告证明缺陷的存在。这种情况下，生产商主观故意的可能性比较小，被判处惩罚性赔偿的可能性也很小。但是，有些生产商的行为是极端恶劣的，在产品进入市场前就知道产品缺陷的存在，仍然将产品投入市场。美国产品责任历史上最为有名的福特汽车公司案最能说明这一点。Grimshaw v．Ford Motor Company...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document