*图片源自网络

*内容版权归聚师网所有,未经聚师网授权严禁转载

One day in 1972, on the highway, Richard Greenshaw, 13, came home in a Ford Pinto car driven by a neighbor. The normal car suddenly slowed down, stopped and was rear-ended. After being hit, the fuel tank exploded and the gasoline overflowed, causing further fire and explosion of the car body. The driver died on the spot. Little Greenshaw suffered severe burns of up to 90 percent. Unfortunately, she lost her nose, left ear and most of her left hand. In the six years since the accident, Little Greenshaw has received more than 60 surgical treatments to repair damaged faces and other injuries.

聚师网教育译:1972年的某天,高速公路上,13岁的理查德·格林萧乘坐邻居驾驶的一辆汽车回家。正常行驶中的汽车突然减速、停止,被后车追尾。被撞后,油箱爆炸,汽油外溢,引起车身进一步起火、爆炸。驾车的女司机当场死亡,小格林萧严重烧伤面积达90%,不幸地失去了鼻子、左耳和大部分左手。这次事故之后的6年里,小格林萧先后接受了60多次手术治疗以修补被毁坏的面容和其他损伤。

The plaintiff's lawyer sued the car company. They pointed out that the accident was caused by a design error of the car. Because the fuel tank is installed in the lower part of the rear seat of the vehicle, it is only a little more than 8 centimeters away from the clutch. Once there is a moderate intensity collision, it can cause an explosion.

聚师网教育译:原告律师向该汽车生产公司提起了诉讼。他们指出该次事故是由于汽车的设计错误所致。由于油箱安装在车辆的后座下部,距离离合器只有8厘米多一点,一旦有中等强度的碰撞就能引起爆炸。

The plaintiff's lawyer filed a lawsuit against Ford Motor Company. They pointed out that the accident was caused by a design error of the car. Because the fuel tank is installed in the lower part of the rear seat of the vehicle, it is only a little more than 8 centimeters away from the clutch. Once there is a moderate intensity collision, it can cause an explosion.

聚师网教育译:在辩护中,格林萧的律师提供了更加令陪审团愤怒的一个事实:在第一批车辆投放市场之前,该公司的两名工程师曾经明确地提出过要在油箱内安装防震的保护装置,但是每辆车因此需要增加11美元的成本。但公司最终决定采取了省钱的方法。

The revelation of this evidence clearly angered the jury. Ford saved nearly $100 million in costs due to the decision not to install the necessary safety devices. The plaintiff's lawyer filed a $100 million claim based on the evidence and calculation, and the jury did not believe that even giving the amount of compensation did not mean that Ford ignored consumer safety penalties. So the jury asked for $25 million to be added to the total savings, which really had the nature of a fine.

聚师网教育译:这一证据的披露显然彻底激怒了陪审团。由于不安装必要的安全装置的决定,该公司节省了将近1亿美元的成本。原告律师基于这一证据和计算提出了1亿美元的赔偿请求,而陪审团认为即使给予这一数额的赔偿也并不意味着对公司无视消费者生命安全的惩罚。所以陪审团要求在节省的总额中加上2,500万美元,使这一数额真正具有了罚款的性质。

聚师网教育点评:现在很多不良的企业为了一时的利润置消费者的生命安全于不顾,偷工减料,制造假冒伪劣产品,严重侵犯消费者的利益。这种屡见不鲜的现象体现了当前市场文化存在的缺陷。当消费者遇到这种不良现象时,应当勇敢地拿起法律武器去维护自身的利益。同样作为企业,加强自身的社会责任感,建设良好的企业文化同样迫在眉睫。身为互联网的教育产业中的一员,聚师网自成立之日起一直致力于保障消费者的权益,传播优秀的企业文化,致力于为整个行业的发展作出自己的贡献。