DUALPLEX 3605Consumers could also be awarded punitive damage for the careless actions of NDB’s research and development team in covering up the product defect. These actions were extremely reckless and showed a pursuit for profit at any cost and a deliberate disregard for the well-being of others (Tort Damages 2019). NBD could however offer several defenses against the claims of the consumers. DefensesOne defense that NDB could use against the claim of negligence, is that of contributory negligence. Under this defense, NDB could counter that the damages occurred as a result of the negligent actions of the consumers, due to their own failure to unplug the laptops when they were fully charged. The contributory negligence defense would bar the consumers from recovering any damages due to their own negligence (Fraud and Negligence Torts, 2019). In defense of strict liability claims, NBD could argue that the consumers’ misuse of the product resulted in their injuries and damages. NBD could claim that not only did they issue a disclaimer against all warranties, they also provided an explicit warning in the instruction manual against leaving the device plugged in after it was fully charged (Fraud and Negligence Torts, 2019). By ignoring this warning, the consumer used the product in a manner that was cautioned against by the manufacturer and so NBD should be held liable.