Product liability cases are often complicated and difficult to prove. If a product has a design defect, it can be difficult for the manufacturer to prove that the product was not defective in design. A plaintiff in a products liability case must prove that the product failed to meet certain requirements as intended by its manufacturer or distributor (sometimes called “original equipment manufacturer”).
Design Defects Supporting Products Liability Claims
Design defects are a type of product liability claim. They’re typically the result of a failure to take into account the safety of the consumer, and can be found in any product, from cars to toys.
For example: If you drive your car down a hill and it flips over and smashes into your neighbor’s house, that would be considered an act or omission on your part—and thus subjecting you to liability for injuries caused by its design. You didn’t have enough control over what happened because there was something wrong with how your vehicle was designed (or should have been designed).
What is a design defect?
A personal injury lawyer in Vaughan knows that design defect is when a product has an unsafe or dangerous feature that causes injury to consumers. The elements of product liability are:
(1) a defect in the design or production;
(2) the defective product was sold; and
(3) there was an injury or harm produced by using said product.
What are defenses for a design defect claim?
There are several common defenses lawyers use to defend against claims of defective products, including:
Misuse – If you didn’t use your car as intended then it’s not your fault! You may have been driving carelessly while intoxicated, but that doesn’t entitle you to sue Ford over damages caused by their faulty door handles on some models from yesteryear! However, if someone else was responsible for driving around drunkards every night before crashing into them again and again because they couldn’t handle being soberthat’s another story altogether.
The Alternative Design Test
The alternative design test is a legal mechanism that allows plaintiffs to recover damages for injuries sustained by using a product that was not designed as intended. In this case, an alternative design would mean an alternate set of instructions or warnings that would prevent injury when used in accordance with those instructions.
The plaintiff must satisfy two requirements under this test: 1) he/she must show that there was an alternative design available (e.g., higher strength steel), and 2) he/she must demonstrate that the defendant failed to implement this option as part of its design process (e.g., did not include warnings about high stress levels).
The Consumer Expectations Test
The consumer expectations test requires the plaintiff to prove that the product’s design was not reasonably safe for its intended use. To meet this requirement, the plaintiff must show that a safer alternative design was available and that the manufacturer failed to use it. The test is often applied in cases involving products liability claims.
If you’ve been injured by a product, it’s important to know if the defect was reasonably foreseeable. This is not always easy to determine in cases of design defects, as many of them have been around for decades before they were released on the market or made available for sale.