Product liability for harmful products

Harmful products

029 2267 5940

Overview

Have you been harmed by a product?

a medical device that has gone wrong?
an unexpected side effect from your medication?
an aircraft or helicopter crash?
a faulty electrical appliance?
a beauty product that has caused an unexpected reaction?
were you warned sufficiently about the risks involved in the use of a device or a drug?
an unsafe consumer product such as a dryer, washing machine or fridge?

In the eyes of the law, if the product did not produce the level of safety you would have expected then it may be considered defective and you may be able to be compensated by the manufacturer for the injuries or losses that follow.

If you were sold a product that was not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose and it injured you, then you may be entitled to bring a claim against the hospital or business that sold it to you.

Our harmful products experience

Our team has many years' experience of bringing successful harmful product claims.

Our expert advice has helped us to be ranked first as a representative of claimants in these types of cases by Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500, the independent guides to Law firms.

Compensation has been recovered for many victims of harmful products such as ordinary household products as well as medical and pharmaceutical devices.

Most recently the firm:

is pursuing further claims of defective intraocular lenses manufactured by Oculentis and supplied by Optical Express or by private hospitals;
represents victims of vaginal mesh implants against the manufacturers and the health authorities responsible for implanting the mesh;
is investigating injuries caused by NutriBullet blenders, retractable dog leads and other consumer products;
is investigating a defective knee implant;
representing claimants where PEEK, a medical compound was used in upper limb joint implants;
investigating failed heart assist and defibrillator devices;
investigating injuries caused by Essure contraception device and failed Gastric bands; and
investigating long-term damage caused by Gadolinium contrast agent.

In the past Hugh James has negotiated:

a settlement protocol for patients who alleged visual problems from their HOYA cataract remedial intraocular lenses;
various confidential settlements arising out of failed hip and spinal devices; and
settlement of claims arising from aircraft and helicopter crashes and for victims of the South Wales E Coli outbreak.

Our personal injury lawyers

assist some of the 700,000 or so people who are injured each year and wish to seek compensation for their losses – and we can assist those who have been injured and who could claim but feel unable to;
investigate each potential claim thoroughly and offer early and ongoing assessments as to the prospects of success in your claim and the likely level of compensation and other remedies you may be entitled to;
help clients who have suffered relatively minor injuries and those who have had the misfortune to suffer catastrophic and life-changing injuries;
work to the highest service standards so that we conclude your case as quickly as possible with the right remedy; and
work on conditional fee agreements (no win, no fee) so that if we don’t win your case there is no bill to pay.

amongst us Deputy District Judges, Recorders, Queens Counsel, Solicitors Regulation Authority specialist panel members, Fellows of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), members of Action for the Victims of Medical Accidents, published authors of legal texts, frequent contributors of legal journal articles and some of the country’s most renowned trainers of other lawyers on all aspects of personal injury law.

Key contact

Mark Harvey

Partner, Head of Specialist Personal Injury

View profile

Mark Harvey is a Partner in the claimant division. He has obtained compensation for many individual victims of common but defective consumer products as well as victims of accidents overseas and arising out of travel generally.

Find advice

I am looking for advice relating to...

Your questions answered

What you need to prove

In order for your harmful product compensation claim to be successful you, as the claimant, will need to establish that the product was defective and that this caused you an injury that you would not have otherwise have suffered.

In other words, you will need to prove that the manufacturer or supplier was liable for the defect in the product and that this caused your injury. We can help you achieve this outcome.

Consumer Protection Act

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 (CPA) applies to any products supplied by manufacturers after the 1 March 1988 and it provides that where any damage is caused "wholly or partly by a defect in the product" the manufacturer and/or supplier will be liable for the damage caused which includes personal injury. The Act imposes a strict liability on the manufacturer/supplier.

Under the CPA it must be proved that the product was defective; that is "the safety of the product was not such as persons generally are entitled to expect".

Once we have proved that the product was defective we will need to prove that the defect in the product caused the damage. This can only be proved on the basis of medical evidence.

Common Law Negligence

Under the common law of negligence it must be established that there was a defect with the product and that there was a duty on the manufacturer to take reasonable care to ensure that it would not cause damage and there has been a breach of that duty by the manufacturer because it was reasonably foreseeable at the time that the product was supplied that injury was likely to occur.

Unlike a claim under the Consumer Protection Act where the onus is on the defendant to show that the defect could not have been identified at the time of supply, under the common law of negligence, the onus is on the claimant to prove that it was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant at the time of supply that the product was defective and would cause injury. This claim is more difficult but may be necessary if the product complained if is more than ten years old.

The Limitation Act provides that the claim must be brought within three years of the date of knowledge that the product was defective and had caused a significant injury.

Contract Law

The third route available is where the device or product has been purchased, as opposed to being supplied by the National Health Service, is to pursue a breach of contract against the contracting party either the private clinician, the private clinic or the seller of the product.

Under the Sale of Goods Act, and for purchases after October 2015, the Consumer Rights Act, every contract has implied into it the requirement that the product must be of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose. This provides a strict liability so the defendant cannot avoid it by saying that they were not aware that the product was not fit for purpose.

Mark Harvey has a wide-ranging practice, which includes product liability, sports accident and travel claims, as well as abuse cases. Sources assert that he is "a really impressive litigator who puts together enormous cases and steers the whole thing."

Chambers and Partners UK

Mark Harvey is a leading practitioner and is the object of praise with regard to his expertise in handling headline product liability claims. One source says: "He's really at the forefront of claimant class and group actions in terms of how to strategically run them. Very few people have as much experience as him."

Chambers and Partners UK

Equally as capable when assisting individual clients as when providing robust support during complex group litigation.

Chambers and Partners UK

The team at Hugh James undertakes work of the utmost complexity in this field. They have the strength-in-depth to be able to take on litigation of any size, from single claims to complex, multi-party medical product litigation'.

Legal 500

Mark Harvey is a complete master in the field; he combines legal knowledge, sound tactical skills and good judgement'.

Legal 500

Mark Harvey is excellent and the person you would want running your product case.

Legal 500

Pauline Roberts is hardworking and very knowledgeable. She has superb client skills and the talent to find 'the something' that can make the difference in the mass of disclosure that often accompanies major litigation in this field'.

Legal 500

The extremely experienced Mark Harvey garners praise from market sources for his "very good understanding of the claimant market." His practice demonstrates considerable prowess in the co-ordination of multiparty proceedings and large group actions, particularly those relating to defective medical devices. Another source describes him as "an excellent cross-border litigator."

Chambers & Partners UK

Department co-head Mark Harvey offers a well-regarded personal injury practice, with particular expertise in product liability claims. One source says: "He has a very strong reputation in Cardiff for being a technically good and tough litigator."

Chambers & Partners UK

I just wanted to say how much I appreciated your hard work and professionalism dealing with my claim against the hip manufacturers with a satisfactory outcome.

Mrs, H

Thank you so very much for everything you have done for me.

Mrs G

Just to say thanks you for all your hard work and support over the last several years, much appreciated

Mrs F

Many thanks for your kindness and excellent service over the past few years

Mr R

Thank you for the compensation that you recovered for me and also your help and guidance that you gave me throughout the case

Mr S

Thank you for all the work you have all put in on my behalf

Mr S

Thank you so much for your help throughout the case, you’ve been excellent keeping me updated and answering any queries I’ve had in a prompt and professional manner. If I ever need the services of a solicitor in the future I shall know where to come.

Miss M

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and your team for all the hard work in achieving this positive outcome. I really am very grateful. Best wishes for the future and sincere thanks once again.

Mrs J