PRODUCT LIABILITY (Hansard, 26 June 1980)

§ Lord GISBOROUGH
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, the Department of Trade is now considering the views of over 300 interested parties whom it consulted last year about the draft directive. The Government will, of course, take account of these and all other views expressed before deciding their attitude to the draft.

§ Lord GISBOROUGH
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. Can he assure the House that the additional cost to the consumer arising from legislation that may he introduced to cover the provisions of the directive will be fully explored before any conclusions are reached concerning the United Kingdom's position?

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, I can indeed give the assurance to my noble friend that these problems are being considered at the moment, and indeed that all views are being taken into account.

§ Baroness HORNSBY-SMITH
My Lords, will my noble friend also give us an assurance that he will consult the retail trade? Is he aware that the proposals that have been made make the retailer responsible for defective goods, and that 1718 in many people's view this is totally unrealistic? However firms check the initial purchase, most goods are prepacked, and purchasers do not want the goods that are open on the counter; they want the prepacked goods that have not been handled. Can my noble friend say how on earth the retailer can know whether they are faulty when he does not make them and does not pack them?

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, I hope that my noble friend does not expect me to go beyond the present law in the United Kingdom, of which no doubt she and the House are aware, because the present position is that any purchaser who is injured or harmed by defective goods can obtain, and indeed does obtain, compensation under the law of contract from the supplier. In this case regrettably it is usually the retailer rather than the manufacturer.

§ The PRINCIPAL DEPUTY CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES (Baroness White)
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he has read, marked, and learned the 50th Report of this Session from your Lordships' Select Committee on the European Communities? The committee took considerable pains in this matter and make a number of recommendations, and I would commend the report to all Members of the House who are interested.

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, the noble Baroness will, I hope, not be surprised to hear that I certainly have read this report. I hope that I have learnt it. I have indeed marked it, and the noble Baroness and the House will, I am sure, have noticed that there is a Motion on the Order Paper (I think that the noble Baroness will find it on page 2689) which is in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, that this report be discussed in your Lordships' House.

§ Baroness HORNSBY-SMITH
My Lords, does not my noble friend agree that, if somebody manufactures a product and a retailer markets it, it is really unrealistic to expect the retailer to be responsible for it since he does not make it?

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, I understand that this position is under review, but 1719 that we cannot go further than the position I mentioned earlier to my noble friend. Indeed, I think it would not be in my province. It is far more in the province of the noble and learned Lord who normally sits upon the Woolsack, and indeed other noble and learned Lords, to pursue this happy subject through the labyrinth of the laws of contract and the laws of liability, because, as my noble friend will no doubt be aware, there are several stages of manufacture.

§ Lord ELWYN-JONES
My Lords, will the noble Lord examine the implications of the case of the snail in the ginger beer bottle and its possible impact on this fascinating subject?

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson is always in my mind. Indeed, this was one of the first steps that I made in my happy education so far in the law. I cannot quote chapter and verse—and indeed I think it was a Scottish case—from this side of the House, but we are aware of that. I hope that the law of strict liability has progressed a little further than that.

§ Lord DRUMALBYN
My Lords, will my noble friend confirm that it is the draft directive that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, is seeking to discuss?

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. Indeed, that is the instruction that I have. But I have no doubt that your Lordships' House will be able to discuss this draft directive, the convention, and indeed other matters so far as strict liability is concerned.