Products Liability in the United Kingdom: The Myths of Reform

By Stapleton, Jane | Texas International Law Journal, Winter 1999 | Go to article overview

Products Liability in the United Kingdom: The Myths of Reform


Stapleton, Jane, Texas International Law Journal


I. INTRODUCTION Comparative products liability is a dangerous business. For example, it may appear to U.S. eyes that the special U.S.-developed rule in the field1 was simply exported first to Europe and then elsewhere but this would be wholly misleading. Certainly when it comes to the European Community,2 the story of the modern creation of a special cause of action for those injured by products is fundamentally different from the corresponding story in the United States.3

For example, whereas in the United States the special product liability rule was created by judges, the special European rule4 was created by the technique of a Directive5 from the Council of the European Communities to the legislatures of the Member States, requiring them to implement its provisions via domestic legislation. Similarly, whereas the history of the U.S. rule reveals no single episode galvanising concern about civil remedies available to consumers, the Thalidomide disaster6 in Europe was clearly the catalyst for the reform processes that culminated in the 1985 Council Directive "on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products."7 It provides a telling benchmark by which to evaluate the impact of the latter.

The doctrinal context is also different in fundamental ways. Let me give three examples. First, judicial loyalty to precedent is much stronger in the United Kingdom than in the United States.8 Second, in the United Kingdom there is only one final court of appeal for matters concerning civil liability-the House of Lords-in striking contrast to the situation in the United States. Third, and of importance specifically in the products liability field, in the United Kingdom an injured worker's receipt of state benefits in relation to his work injury does not preempt a civil claim against anyone, not even his employer or any third party involved in the manufacture or supply of a product implicated in the causation of the injury.9

Even more broadly, the socio-legal context in which the European rule operates would be unrecognisable to the average practitioner in the United States. In the United Kingdom, for example, the loser pays not only his own but the winner's costs;10 neither punitive damages nor juries (save in Scotland) are available for products liability claims; and the operation of the National Health Service has in the past operated to relieve most tortfeasors from the costs of their victims' medical treatment.11 Moreover, the "European product liability rule" is in fact not one rule at all; despite the vaunted claim that the Directive was aimed at the approximation of product regimes across Member States, in a real sense, it has merely added onto existing regimes a further level of disparate rules varying, for example, according to which options in the Directive were implemented and what local rules exist in relation to non-pecuniary loss.12

Yet the U.S. products liability experience-or more correctly how that experience was perceived in Europe-did have real influence on Europe's moves toward its own rule in the Directive. During the early to mid-seventies, when European governments were beginning to lock themselves into the rhetoric of this "necessary" law reform, the popular perception of the U.S. rule encouraged the view that a reform focused on products was workable, acceptable, and broadly beneficial.13 Even today, when Europeans have a more sophisticated understanding of the U.S. experience and its limited practical relevance to the working of European liability regimes, the U.S. experience nevertheless exercises a powerful hand on products liability debate in Europe. The most important example is perhaps the way the indistinct U.S. usage of the term "strict liability" continues to bedevil discussion of this field and the law of obligations generally. What this means is that while it is unhelpful, even meaningless, simply to lay out side-by-side, say, the U. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Products Liability in the United Kingdom: The Myths of Reform
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.