Lance buys a new racing bike direct from the manufacturer, Sleekbike. Unfortunately, the bike has a manufacturing defect that causes the bolt holding the wheels to the bike to become loose when the bike travels at high speeds. When the bike is delivered, he shows it to his friend Martin, who asks if he can ride it. While Martin is racing through the streets, this bolt starts to become loose and the front wheel becomes shaky but he decides to continue riding to get back to Lance's house. Martin loses control of the bike, crashes into a tree, and suffers severe injuries. Martin sues Sleekbike on the basis of strict liability in tort. Sleekbike admits that the bike was defective but denies liability, particularly because Martin was not the person who purchased the bike. In other words, Martin had no contractual relationship with Sleekbike. Discuss the validity of Sleekbike's defense. Are there any other defenses that Sleekbike might assert to avoid liability based on this tort claim? Discuss fully using the IRAC method. (Note: This questions centers of the part of the dispute dealing with the defendant's desire to gain partial or complete relief from liability. There is no need to prove the elements of strict liability for product defects since the Company, Sleekbike, has already admitted liability for the defective product.)