Defective Honolulu Products And Product Liability Attorneys

Defective Products and Product Liability Attorneys

Defective products by manufacture and design are an inevitability in an increasingly materialistic world, and while product safety benchmarks continue to become more strenuous, simple human error and oversight can still result in defective products and ultimately product recalls in order to prevent public harm.

As a manufacturer or even a retailer of defective products, the scope for liability in respect of injuries caused by those defective products is massive, and so there is a real impetus on those involved in disseminating potentially dangerous, defective products to employ rigorous internal safety procedures and policies to avoid liability. In instances where injury does nevertheless arise as a result of the use or consumption of defective products, the legal profession is on hand to assist in redressing the balance through an action for damages.

The Taxonomy of a Product Liability Claim

When pursuing civil remedies in respect of damage caused by defective Honolulu products, the plaintiff must establish a number of key points in the first instance in order to be in a position where it is legally possible to achieve a satisfactory outcome. While this depends on the exact nature of the factual circumstances concerned, in general a typical product liability claim takes the following structure:

• Duty of Care
The duty of care is a fundamental concept in respect of defect products law and negligence more broadly. The concept of a duty of care can be seen most clearly in the famous landmark Scottish House of Lords case Donoghue v. Stevenson, the approach in which has found favor in courts around the world, in which it was held (amongst other things) that product manufacturers owe a duty of care to those using or consuming said products.

• Breach of Duty of Care
In order for a party to be held liable for defective products, the existence of a duty of care is insufficient alone unless there has also been some breach of that duty, i.e. some act or omission deemed to breach the implied regard product manufacturers ought to have for the safety of their customers.

• Injury
Thirdly, it must be established that the plaintiff has suffered some form of injury, as a result of the breached duty of care established as above. In order for an action to succeed, all three elements must be proven to a sufficient standard.

It is also worth noting that an action in respect of defective products need not arise solely in tort, but also in contract where the end consumer purchased the product in question, or what’s known as ‘breach of warranty’. A legal professional will be in the best position to determine on the basis of the facts of your particular case the best route to pursue.

The Law Offices of Macey & Searns (www.injuryexperts.com) are a firm of specialist attorneys, with expertise in personal injury and defective Honolulu products liability actions. An attorney from the Law Offices of Macey & Searns can help determine the viability of a particular case and the most effective action plan going forward, with a view to pursuing the manufacturer or some other party in respect of the damages caused.