Henderson v. AEI Inc. [2005] IEHC 390 (12 May 2005)

Henderson v. AEI Inc. [2005] IEHC 390 (12 May 2005)

Discovery is not necessary because the Liability for Defective Products Act, 1991 imposes strict liability, requiring proof only of defect, damage, and causal link; the alternative common law claim is redundant and will not be determined if the statutory claim fails.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] IEHC 390
Parties
Plaintiff: Sara Henderson; Plaintiff: Deirdre House; Defendant: AEI Inc.; Defendant: Lipomatrix Inc.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
12 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Product Liability / Discovery Application
Outcome
Discovery application refused
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Discovery, Defective Products, Breach of Statutory Duty, Negligence
Product Liability Tort Law Consumer Protection Strict Liability Discovery Defective Products Breach of Statutory Duty Negligence

Source-derived case record

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sara Henderson

Plaintiff

Deirdre House

Plaintiff

AEI Inc.

Defendant

Lipomatrix Inc.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Product Liability / Discovery Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs are entitled to discovery of documents relating to the defendant's knowledge, testing, withdrawal, warnings, and correspondence regarding Trilucent breast implants
  2. 2 Whether discovery is necessary for proof under the Liability for Defective Products Act, 1991 or for common law negligence claims

Ratio Decidendi

Discovery is not necessary because the Liability for Defective Products Act, 1991 imposes strict liability, requiring proof only of defect, damage, and causal link; the alternative common law claim is redundant and will not be determined if the statutory claim fails.

Court Disposition

Discovery application refused

Orders

  • Discovery of documents sought by plaintiffs is not granted