If there are injury-causing substances that are foreign or not normally found in a food product (such as a piece of glass or wire), the provider of such food may be held liable on product liability and breach of warranty theories.
Strict product liability is meant to ensure that producers and marketers of a product do not sell something that is defective for the sole purpose of making profits while disregarding the safety and welfare of their consumers. A product is defective in design if it failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect (or have a right to expect) when using the product in an intended or reasonably foreseeable manner.
Barker v. Lull Engineering Co. (1978) citing Wade, On the Nature of Strict Tort Liability for Products (1973)
“[The] natural application [of the term ‘defective’] would be limited to the situation in which something went wrong in the manufacturing process, so that the article was defective in the sense that the manufacturer had not intended it to be in that condition.”
The concept is that all those involved in the marketing “enterprise,” and who have reaped profits by placing a defective product in the stream of commerce, should bear the costs of injuries caused by that product [Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964)].
If one is injured because of a seemingly defective product, it is best to work with a lawyer who is an expert in personal injury to be properly advised and guided on the necessary steps to take.