Design Defects under Advanced Torts
Sure! Here’s a detailed explanation of Design Defects under Advanced Torts (Product Liability) law:
Design Defects in Product Liability (Advanced Torts)
What is a Design Defect?
A design defect occurs when a product is manufactured correctly but is inherently unsafe due to the way it was designed. The defect is in the product’s plan or blueprint rather than in its construction.
Legal Context
Design defects are one of the three main types of product defects:
Manufacturing Defect — product deviates from intended design
Design Defect — product design itself is unsafe
Failure to Warn — inadequate instructions or warnings about risks
Key Elements to Prove a Design Defect Claim
Generally, the plaintiff must show:
The product was defectively designed, making it unreasonably dangerous.
The defect caused the injury.
The product was used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable way.
The plaintiff suffered actual damages.
Tests for Design Defect Liability
There are two major tests courts use to evaluate design defect claims:
1. Consumer Expectation Test
Would an ordinary consumer expect the product to be safe in the way it was designed?
If the product is more dangerous than an ordinary consumer would expect, it is defective.
2. Risk-Utility Test (More Common in Advanced Torts)
Weighs the risks of the product’s design against its utility (benefits).
Factors considered include:
The severity and likelihood of harm,
The feasibility of a safer alternative design,
The cost of safer design,
The product’s utility to the user and public.
Safer Alternative Design (SAD)
Plaintiff often must propose a feasible safer alternative design.
The alternative design must be:
Technically and economically feasible,
Safer than the design used by the defendant,
Not impair the product’s usefulness or cost-effectiveness significantly.
Strict Liability and Design Defects
Most jurisdictions impose strict liability for defective products, including design defects.
The manufacturer/designer can be held liable regardless of fault or negligence.
Defenses to Design Defect Claims
State of the art defense: The design complied with the highest technology and scientific knowledge at the time of manufacture.
Product misuse: The injury resulted from unforeseeable or improper use.
Comparative negligence: The plaintiff’s own fault reduces liability.
Assumption of risk: Plaintiff knowingly used a dangerous product.
Summary Table
| Aspect | Description |
|---|---|
| What it means | Product’s design makes it unreasonably dangerous |
| Tests | Consumer expectation test OR risk-utility test |
| Key proof requirement | Safer alternative design often needed |
| Liability standard | Strict liability in most jurisdictions |
| Defenses | State of the art, misuse, comparative negligence, assumption of risk |
RELATED Blog
0 comments