Product liability - Duty of care of manufacturers

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to explain the legal duty of care owed by manufacturers to consumers, identify the requirements for establishing negligence in product liability, and distinguish between common law and statutory (Consumer Protection Act 1987) liability. You will also be able to apply these principles to SQE1-style scenarios and recognise key terms and defences relevant to manufacturer liability.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the duty of care owed by manufacturers in product liability claims. Focus your revision on:

  • the common law duty of care of manufacturers to consumers (including the Donoghue v Stevenson principle)
  • the elements required to establish negligence in product liability
  • the scope of liability and who can claim
  • the role of intermediate examination
  • the distinction between common law negligence and strict liability under the Consumer Protection Act 1987
  • the main defences available to manufacturers

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. What is the key case that established the modern duty of care for manufacturers in product liability?
  2. Who can bring a claim against a manufacturer for a defective product under common law?
  3. What is the effect of an intermediate examination on a manufacturer's liability?
  4. Under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, is it necessary to prove negligence to succeed in a claim for a defective product?
  5. Name one statutory defence available to manufacturers under the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

Introduction

When a consumer is harmed by a defective product, the law may impose liability on the manufacturer. For SQE1, you must know when a manufacturer owes a duty of care, how that duty is established, and how liability can arise under both common law negligence and the Consumer Protection Act 1987. This article explains the key legal principles, terms, and defences relevant to the duty of care of manufacturers in product liability.

The Common Law Duty of Care

The Donoghue v Stevenson Principle

The modern law of product liability began with the case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, which established that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of its products.

Key Term: duty of care
A legal obligation to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that could foreseeably cause harm to another.

Key Term: manufacturer
Any party who produces, assembles, installs, repairs, or supplies a product before it reaches the consumer.

The "neighbour principle" from Donoghue v Stevenson means that a manufacturer must take reasonable care to ensure that products are safe for those who are likely to use them. This duty is not limited to the person who purchased the product, but extends to anyone who could foreseeably be affected.

Elements of Negligence in Product Liability

To succeed in a negligence claim against a manufacturer, the claimant must prove:

  • The manufacturer owed a duty of care to the claimant.
  • The manufacturer breached that duty by failing to meet the standard of a reasonable manufacturer.
  • The breach caused the claimant's injury or damage.
  • The damage was not too remote (i.e., it was a foreseeable consequence).

Key Term: negligence
A breach of a legal duty to take care, resulting in damage to another.

Who Can Claim?

The duty of care is owed to any person who it is reasonably foreseeable may be affected by the product, not just the purchaser. This includes users, bystanders, and even property owners affected by the product.

What is a Product?

Key Term: product
Any manufactured item capable of causing harm, including its packaging, instructions, and warnings.

Intermediate Examination

A manufacturer may avoid liability if, before the product reaches the consumer, there is a reasonable expectation that an intermediate party (such as a retailer or installer) will examine the product and discover any defect.

Key Term: intermediate examination
An inspection or check of a product by a third party before it reaches the consumer, which may break the chain of causation.

If an intermediate examination is likely and should have revealed the defect, the manufacturer may not be liable for harm caused by the defect.

Scope of Liability

The manufacturer is liable for personal injury and damage to property caused by a defective product. However, the cost of repairing or replacing the defective product itself is considered pure economic loss and is not recoverable in negligence.

Worked Example 1.1

Scenario:
A consumer buys a kettle that explodes due to a manufacturing defect, causing burns and damaging the kitchen wall. Can the consumer claim against the manufacturer for all losses?

Answer:
The consumer can claim for personal injury (burns) and property damage (kitchen wall) caused by the defective kettle. The cost of replacing the kettle itself is pure economic loss and is not recoverable in negligence.

Defences to Negligence

Manufacturers may defend a negligence claim by showing:

  • There was a reasonable possibility of intermediate examination that should have revealed the defect.
  • The product was not defective when it left the manufacturer.
  • The claimant misused the product or ignored clear warnings.

Statutory Liability: Consumer Protection Act 1987

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 (CPA) imposes strict liability for defective products. This means the claimant does not need to prove negligence—only that the product was defective and caused damage.

Key Term: strict liability
Liability imposed without the need to prove fault or negligence.

Elements of a CPA Claim

To succeed under the CPA, the claimant must show:

  • They suffered damage (personal injury or property damage over £275).
  • The damage was caused by a defect in a product.
  • The defendant was a producer, own-brander, importer, or (in limited cases) a supplier.

Key Term: defect
A product is defective if its safety is not such as persons generally are entitled to expect.

Who is Liable?

Liability under the CPA can attach to:

  • The producer (manufacturer) of the product or a component.
  • Anyone who puts their name or trademark on the product (own-brander).
  • Anyone who imports the product into the UK from outside the UK.
  • A supplier, but only if they cannot identify the producer or importer.

Defences under the CPA

Manufacturers and others can defend a CPA claim by proving:

  • The defect was due to compliance with legal requirements.
  • The product was not supplied in the course of business.
  • The defect did not exist at the time of supply.
  • The state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time did not allow the defect to be discovered (development risks defence).
  • The defect was due to the design of a finished product, not the component.

Worked Example 1.2

Scenario:
A consumer is injured by a blender that shatters during use. The manufacturer argues that the defect could not have been discovered with the scientific knowledge available at the time. Can the manufacturer avoid liability?

Answer:
If the manufacturer can prove that the defect could not have been discovered given the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time, they may succeed with the development risks defence under the CPA.

Exam Warning

For SQE1, remember that under the CPA, the claimant does not need to prove negligence. Liability is strict, but not absolute—statutory defences may apply.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • The duty of care owed by manufacturers to consumers is established by Donoghue v Stevenson.
  • Negligence in product liability requires proof of duty, breach, causation, and damage.
  • The duty extends to all foreseeable users, not just purchasers.
  • Intermediate examination may break the chain of liability.
  • Liability in negligence covers personal injury and property damage, but not pure economic loss.
  • The Consumer Protection Act 1987 imposes strict liability for defective products.
  • Under the CPA, claimants do not need to prove negligence.
  • Statutory defences are available to manufacturers under the CPA.

Key Terms and Concepts

  • duty of care
  • manufacturer
  • negligence
  • product
  • intermediate examination
  • strict liability
  • defect
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Barbri SQE
One-time Fee
$3,800-6,900
BPP SQE
One-time Fee
$5,400-8,200
College of Legal P...
One-time Fee
$2,300-9,100
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Law Training Centr...
One-time Fee
$500-6,200
QLTS SQE
One-time Fee
$2,500-3,800
University of Law...
One-time Fee
$6,200-22,400

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal