How does the manufacturer of a centrifuge extractor respond to a claim for damages arising out of a contract?

In a simplistic sense it is obvious that this liability does not arise out of contract concepts if such concepts be thought of as the means for analyzing the jural relationship between two parties who have entered into a contractual relationship prior to the date on which injury is sustained. Here none of these plaintiffs had had any association with the manufacturer of the centrifuge extractors prior to being injured. Nor are these claims grounded in any contention that the liability of the manufacturer stems from its nonperformance of an obligation to plaintiffs arising out of an agreement, express or implied. Rather than arising out of the 'will or intention of the parties', the liability imposed on the manufacturer under strict products liability, whether it be to purchaser, user, or innocent bystander, is predicated largely on considerations of sound social policy (Codling v. Paglia, supra, 32 N.Y.2d pp. 340--341, 345 N.Y.S.2d pp. 467--468, 298 N.E.2d p. 627).