Product Liability: Negligence and the Consumer Protection Act 1987

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
Locked
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/19

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

Flashcards covering the core principles of Product Liability in Tort, including Negligence rules and the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

Last updated 4:05 PM on 6/17/26
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai
Chat

No analytics yet

Send a link to your students to track their progress

20 Terms

1
New cards

Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] 'wide rule'

The well-known 'neighbour principle' formulated by Lord Atkin used to determine a duty of care in 'novel' situations.

2
New cards

Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] 'narrow rule'

The principle establishing that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the consumer when a product reaches the consumer in the form it left the manufacturer with no reasonable possibility of intermediate examination.

3
New cards

Manufacturer (Negligence)

A widely interpreted category including anyone who works on a product before it reaches the consumer, such as repairers, installers, and in some cases, suppliers.

4
New cards

Product (Negligence)

Covers almost any item capable of causing damage, including the packaging, containers, labels, and instructions supplied with the item.

5
New cards

Consumer (Negligence)

Includes the ultimate user of a product and anyone the defendant should reasonably have in mind as likely to be injured by the negligence.

6
New cards

Intermediate Examination

A reasonable possibility of inspecting a product before use; if a manufacturer believes such an examination is likely to take place, they may not owe a duty under the narrow rule.

7
New cards

Pure Economic Loss (Negligence)

Losses stemming purely from the defective quality of the item itself, such as the reduction in value, repair costs, or replacement costs, which are not recoverable in negligence.

8
New cards

Res ipsa loquitur (Product Liability)

A legal maxim meaning 'the thing speaks for itself'; Lord Macmillan in Donoghue v Stevenson stated it should not be relied on in product liability, though courts may still 'infer' breach from proven facts.

9
New cards

Wagon Mound test

The standard 'remoteness' test in negligence used to determine if the claimant's loss is of a reasonably foreseeable type.

10
New cards

Consumer Protection Act 1987 (CPA 1987)

A statute creating a statutory tort of strict liability for damage caused by defective products, providing an additional cause of action to negligence.

11
New cards

Damage (CPA 1987 definition)

Includes death and personal injury (unlimited) and damage to private property exceeding 275275 pounds, excluding business property and the cost of the defective product itself.

12
New cards

Defect (CPA 1987 definition)

A state where the safety of a product is not such as persons generally are entitled to expect, taking into account presentation, expected use, and age.

13
New cards

Product (CPA 1987 definition)

Any goods or electricity, including components or raw materials comprised in another product.

14
New cards

Producer

The manufacturer of a product or its component parts.

15
New cards

Own-brander

A person who, by putting their name or trademark on a product, holds themselves out as being its producer.

16
New cards

Importer (CPA 1987)

A person who imports a product into the UK from outside the UK in order to supply it to another.

17
New cards

Forgetful supplier

A supplier who is liable under the CPA 1987 only if they fail to identify a person in the supply chain (e.g., manufacturer) when requested by the victim.

18
New cards

Strict Liability

A form of liability where the defendant is responsible for damage without the claimant needing to prove fault or carelessness.

19
New cards

Development risks defence

A defence under the CPA 1987 where the state of knowledge at the time of supply was not such that a producer could have discovered the defect.

20
New cards

Section 11.3.8.1 CPA Defence

Compliance with a legal requirement absolves a producer from liability only if the defect was an inevitable result of that compliance.