Incorporating the development risks defence (DRD) into Product Liability Directive 85/374/EEC has been the most controversial issue in product liability debates. Although it is possible for the Member States to derogate from the DRD, only Finland and Luxemburg apply development risk derogation set out in Article 15 §1(b) of the Directive to all products. This derogation is partially applied in France, Spain and Hungry. Aside from providing an introduction to history of the divergences on DRD at national and supranational levels, this paper analyses economic and legal bases of proponent of this defence and critically makes separate analysis about them. Overall, economic and legal views of the opponents refer to bases that specially manifest themselves in academic literature and the legislative, economic, political debates. With reference to the European literature and debates, this paper attempts to elaborate that the DRD is not only an economic and legal issue but also social and political one. Regarding to these diffused bases, it is possible to conclude that the arguments put forward in favour of maintaining the DRD are susceptible to criticism.
Read full abstract