Determining a defect Flashcards
Wilkes v DePuy
should be focused on determining whether there was in fact a defect in the product and, if so, what the defect might be (rather than first identifying the harmful characteristic that caused the party to suffer injury). aside from the legitimate expectations test, the level of safety test is objective, products involve a balancing test of benefits and risks; just because a product has risks does not mean that it is automatically defective. parties must prove a link between defect and damage.
The focus should be determining the proper level of safety for a product.
Gee & Ors v DePuy
defect is an objective concept but should be flexible in its intepretation. If it has the potential to cause an abnormal amount of harm then it could be viewed as being defective.
Love v Halfords
A bike supplied by Halfords suffered failures on the steering mechanism. causing the bike to crash and caused love injuries. L then failed to prove it was a defect in manufacturing on the balance of probabilities. it was more likely caused by a steering incident.
Boston Scientific v AOK
potential defects may amount to defects in respect o the act. something may not yet be a proven defect in a product.
A pacemaker was fitted to a patient with heart condition. this was a cautionary measure as it was moved from a number of patients and could potentially be defective. The potential defectiveness was enough to warrant liability under the act.
