11. Product Liability under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

This is the 11th post in Unit V — the earlier posts covered the structure and remedies of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019; this post looks closely at the one chapter that lets a consumer claim compensation for harm caused by a defective product or deficient service.

The Problem This Topic Solves

When a defective product injures someone, for example a faulty pressure cooker that explodes, the injured person usually knows little about how it was made. Under the old common-law rule, the person had to prove the maker was negligent, which was very hard. Chapter VI of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (Sections 82 to 87) addresses this by listing the grounds on which makers, service providers and sellers are liable.

From Common Law to Statute

In Donoghue v. Stevenson, the House of Lords held that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of its product. The claimant still had to prove breach and damage under the law of negligence. The 2019 Act gives product liability its own statutory chapter. Its provisions on product liability came into force with the Act from 20 July 2020. The consumer relies on the specific grounds listed in the Act instead of proving every element of negligence from the start.

Key Definitions

• Product liability (Section 2(34)) — the responsibility of a product manufacturer or product seller, of any product or service, to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by a defective product manufactured or sold, or by deficiency in services relating to it.
• Harm (Section 2(22)) — damage to property other than the product itself; personal injury, illness or death; mental agony or emotional distress attached to injury or illness or property damage; and loss of consortium or services. It does not include harm to the product itself, damage on account of breach of warranty conditions, or commercial or economic loss.
• Product liability action (Section 83) — a complaint for compensation for harm, brought against a product manufacturer, a product service provider or a product seller.

Liability of the Product Manufacturer

Under Section 84, a product manufacturer is liable if any one of the following is proved:

1. the product contains a manufacturing defect;
2. the product is defective in design;
3. there is a deviation from manufacturing specifications;
4. the product does not conform to the express warranty; or
5. the product fails to contain adequate instructions for correct use, or a warning about improper use, to prevent harm.

Liability of the Product Service Provider

Under Section 85, a product service provider is liable if the service was faulty, imperfect or deficient; if there was an act of omission, commission or negligence or conscious withholding of information that caused harm; if it did not issue adequate instructions or warnings; or if the service did not conform to the express warranty or the terms of the contract.

Liability of the Product Seller

Under Section 86, a product seller who is not the manufacturer is liable if it:

• exercised substantial control over the design, testing, manufacture, packaging or labelling of the product;
• altered or modified the product, and the alteration caused the harm;
• made an express warranty independent of the manufacturer's, and the product did not conform to it;
• sold the product when the identity of the manufacturer was not known, or the manufacturer could not be served; or
• failed to exercise reasonable care in assembling, inspecting or maintaining the product, or did not pass on the manufacturer's warnings or instructions.

Exceptions

Section 87 gives defences, including these:

• A product liability action cannot be brought against a seller if the product was misused, altered or modified at the time of harm.
• A manufacturer is not liable for failure to warn where the product was bought by an employer for workplace use and the manufacturer gave warnings or instructions to the employer, or where warnings were given to the buyer of a component used in another product.
• A manufacturer is not liable for failing to warn of a danger that is obvious or commonly known to the user.
• A manufacturer is not liable where the user was under the influence of alcohol or a prescription drug that had not been prescribed by a medical practitioner.

• Chapter VI (Sections 82-87) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 deals with product liability.
• Three kinds of defendants: manufacturer (Section 84), service provider (Section 85) and seller (Section 86).
• Section 84 grounds: manufacturing defect, design defect, deviation from specifications, non-conformity with express warranty, and failure to give adequate instructions or warnings.
• "Harm" covers property damage (other than to the product itself), personal injury, illness, death and mental agony; it excludes commercial or economic loss.
• Section 87 gives defences, such as misuse, alteration or modification of the product, and obvious dangers.

• The grounds are alternative: proving any one is enough for liability.
• Product liability sits alongside common-law negligence; the consumer may choose the route that suits the case.
• Exam trap: harm to the product itself and pure economic loss do not count as "harm" for a product liability action.

A Practical Example

A pressure cooker's safety valve fails because of a flaw in its design, and the cooker explodes, burning the user. The user files a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the manufacturer under Section 84, relying on the design defect. If the retailer had altered the cooker, or if the cooker had been misused, the seller or manufacturer could raise the exceptions in Section 87. The user can claim compensation for personal injury and mental agony, but not for the cooker's own price as "harm".

Quick Revision Points

• Chapter VI: Sections 82-87; product liability action against manufacturer, service provider or seller.
• Section 2(34): definition of product liability; Section 2(22): definition of harm (excludes harm to the product itself and economic loss).
• Section 84: five grounds for manufacturer; Section 85: service provider; Section 86: seller.
• Section 87: exceptions, including misuse or alteration, workplace purchases with warnings and obvious dangers.
• Background: Donoghue v. Stevenson duty of care; statute removes the need to prove every element of negligence.