Introduction
The latest developments in EU product liability law stem from the adoption of a new EU Directive 2024/2853 on liability for defective products and a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C‑157/23, Ford Italia SpA v Stracciari SpA. Together, these changes reshape liability standards, impacting manufacturers, suppliers, and other economic operators.
1. New Product Liability Directive
On 23 October 2024, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted a new Product Liability Directive (PLD) to protect consumers and adapt to new technologies, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). The key changes include:
- Expanded Definitions: The new PLD broadens the definition of “product” to encompass digital manufacturing files, raw materials, and software, with the exception of free and open-source software used outside of commercial activities unless incorporated into a commercial product. Additionally, it replaces the term “producer” with “manufacturer” and introduces new definitions for “economic operators” (such as authorised representatives, importers, and distributors), “digital manufacturing file”, “related service”, “component”, “manufacturer’s control”, “making available on the market”, “placing on the market”, “putting into service”, and “substantial modification”.
- Types of Damage covered: Compensation now includes medically recognised damage to psychological health, and destruction or corruption of data not used for professional purposes, in addition to personal injury or death.
- Product Defectiveness and Burden of Proof: The new PLD revises the criteria for assessing a product’s defectiveness, such as not meeting safety expectations or legal safety requirements. This includes factors like labelling, design, technical features, and cybersecurity requirements. It introduces a rebuttable presumption of defectiveness if the defendant does not disclose relevant evidence or if specific conditions are met, which reduces the claimant’s burden of proof.
- Product Modifications and Online Platforms: Substantially modifying a product outside the manufacturer’s control and placing it on the market or putting it into service may shift liability for defects to the modifier, unless the defect causing the damage relates to a part of the product not affected by the modification. Online platform providers can also be held liable under certain conditions.
- Joint Liability and Right of Recourse: When multiple economic operators are responsible for the same damage, they can be held jointly and severally liable. The economic operator who has compensated the injured party has a right of recourse and can seek remedies from the other liable economic operator.
- Extended Statute of Limitations: The 10-year statute of limitations for legal proceedings can be extended to 25 years in cases involving latent personal injury.
- Transparency: EU Member States are required to publish final court judgments on product liability in an accessible electronic format. The European Commission will maintain a public database of these judgments.
The new PLD, published on 18 November 2024, has entered into force 20 days after publication and will apply to products placed on the market after 24 months. EU Member States must ensure compliance by 9 December 2026.
2. The EU Court of Justice rules that a supplier can in some cases be considered a producer
In a judgment of 19 December 2024 in Ford Italia SpA v Stracciari, the CJEU clarified supplier liability under the former PLD and ruled that suppliers can be deemed producers if their branding creates an impression of responsibility, even without directly placing their name on the product.
- Facts: An Italian consumer bought a Ford car from the dealer Stracciari, manufactured by Ford Wag in Germany and supplied by Ford Italia. After an accident where the airbag failed, the consumer sued the dealer (Stracciari) and the supplier (Ford Italia) for damages. Ford Italia, not having manufactured the vehicle, contested its liability. The Italian Supreme Court asked the CJEU whether a supplier can be considered a producer, even without placing its name on the product.
- Decision: The CJEU ruled that a supplier of a product can be considered “a person who presents him- or herself as a producer” of that product within the meaning of Article 3, § 1 of the former PLD, if the trade mark on the product matches their name or a distinctive element thereof, even if they did not place their name on the product.
- Comment: This decision builds upon an earlier judgment of the CJEU of 7 July 2022 in C-264/21, Keskinäinen Vakuutusyhtiö Fennia v Koninklijke Philips NV (reported here: Produits défectueux | Le titulaire d’une marque est responsable du produit revêtu de sa marque – Simont Braun) where it held that the liability of a person who presents him- or herself as a producer by affixing their name, trade mark or other distinguishing feature is no different from that of the ‘actual’ producer, and that the consumer may freely choose to claim full compensation for damage from any one of them, since they are liable jointly and severally.
3. Implications of the new PLD and the CJEU’s Ruling
- Broader Scope and Extended Liability: The new PLD expands who may be deemed liable, while the CJEU ruling reinforces supplier accountability through branding.
- Enhanced Consumer Protection: Both developments collectively lower barriers for consumers to seek compensation from multiple responsible parties.
- Impact on Business Practices: Companies must update their contracts, branding strategies, and liability coverage to manage expanded exposure under both the new PLD and CJEU interpretations.
For any questions or assistance, please reach out to our
Intellectual Property Team | IP@simontbraun.eu – +32 (0)2 543 70 80
***
This newsletter is not a legal advice or a legal opinion. You should seek advice from a legal counsel of your choice before acting upon any of the information in this newsletter.
