header-logo header-logo

07 December 2012 / Mary Blyth
Issue: 7541 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury , Limitation
printer mail-detail

A heavy burden

The time is right to introduce a bespoke procedure for personal injury product claims, argues Mary Blyth

In the past 11 months there has been a tsunami of claims for defective medical devices, such as PIP breast implants and metal hip implants. How do we reconcile the procedure for personal injury law, so that it fits in with the demands of consumer and contract law for product liability cases and ensure that it is reasonable and proportionate?

In his final Access to justice report of July 1996, Lord Woolf set out a set of helpful protocols to accompany the Civil Procedure  Rules. Only four of the 12 protocols refer to personal injury claims specifically.

This is the time to introduce a product liability protocol for the reasons below:

  • the number of potential defendants increases in product liability claims (manufacturer, perceived manufacturer, EU importer, supplier) and more investigation is required by the claimant;
  • there is a requirement for proof that the product is defective and this usually requires expert evidence;
  • the limitation may fall into one of three dates: Consumer Protection Act 1987
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll