Baker v KTM Sportmotorcycle UK Ltd & Anor

Baker v KTM Sportmotorcycle UK Ltd & Anor

The susceptibility of the motorcycle's braking system to galvanic corrosion after limited and normal use, despite proper servicing and cleaning, constituted a defect under section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987. It was not necessary to identify the precise nature of the defect. The defect caused the accident and resulting injury. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mr Baker; Defendant/appellant: KTM Sportmotorcycle UK Ltd & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Defective Products, Consumer Protection Act 1987, Personal Injury, Manufacturer's Liability
Product Liability Consumer Protection Tort Law Defective Products Consumer Protection Act 1987 Personal Injury Manufacturer's Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Baker

Claimant/respondent

KTM Sportmotorcycle UK Ltd & Anr

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether galvanic corrosion in the motorcycle's braking system constituted a defect under section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987
  2. 2 Whether the defect caused the accident and resulting injury
  3. 3 Whether it was necessary to prove a specific design or manufacturing defect

Ratio Decidendi

The susceptibility of the motorcycle's braking system to galvanic corrosion after limited and normal use, despite proper servicing and cleaning, constituted a defect under section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987. It was not necessary to identify the precise nature of the defect. The defect caused the accident and resulting injury. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs of and occasioned by the appeal to be paid by the appellant to the respondent, to be assessed by detailed assessment if not agreed