Answer:
The correct answer is the last option: T.J. manufactures cheap clothing that falls apart after minimal use.
Explanation:
To begin with, the term known as "Strict Liability", in criminal and civil law, refers to the situation in which a person is legally responsible for the consequences flowing from an activity that it also applies even in those cases where there is an absence of fault or criminal intent from the figure of the defendant under court. Therefore that in the situations that are presented the one in where the strict liability does not applies is the case of T.J manufacturing cheap clothes because the person knows what the product is worth.
The following is not a situation in which strict liability applies is :
D) T.J. manufactures cheap clothing that falls apart after minimal use.
The following is not a situation in which strict liability applies is that T.J. manufactures cheap clothing that falls apart after minimal use.
The strict liability exists when a litigant is at risk for committing an activity, notwithstanding of what his/her aim or mental state was when committing the activity.
In criminal law, ownership violations and statutory assault are both cases of strict risk offenses.
Therefore, that in the circumstances that are displayed the one in where the strict obligation does not applies is the case of T.J fabricating cheap dress since the individual knows what the item is worth.
Learn more about "Liability":
https://brainly.com/question/10934939?referrer=searchResults
