Abstract
This article studies the recent European developments concerning product liability in the aviation domain. Particularly the landmark judgment in Überlingen Manufacturers provided new insights on the definition of product defects (manufacturing, design and warning defects) and the availability of liability defences (state of the art defence and regulatory compliance). The article finds that the judgment both enhances manufacturers’ liability risks, by providing a wide interpretation of product defects, and limits the risk by accepting the regulatory compliance defence for technologies certified to a mandatory standard. The article compares US and EU product liability law, concluding that the outcome of the case would likely have been similar under both regimes. The article highlights that product liability must be considered beyond individual cases, as an element of systemic risk regulation. This necessitates that the link between ownership of design choices, mandatory certification and legal liability be addressed more purposefully. The article identifies that currently the regulatory compliance defence may create a legal gap in this respect: standard-setters and certifiers are responsible for product design choices, but cannot be held legally accountable through liability. The article concludes with suggestions for adapting the legal framework to improve liability allocation through product liability.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.