Assessment: Faulty Product (201606-008042) [2017] ZACGSO 2 (20 April 2017)

Assessment: Faulty Product (201606-008042) [2017] ZACGSO 2 (20 April 2017)

The Ombud found that the Complainant used the lawnmower contrary to the instructions and warnings provided in the manual, specifically by operating in wet grass and attempting to clear blockages without ensuring the machine was switched off. Both manuals submitted by the parties contained clear warnings against such conduct. The Complainant did not return the product for inspection, and the product has operated without fault since the incident. There was insufficient evidence to establish a defect in the product at the time of supply or inadequate instructions. Accordingly, the Supplier cannot be held liable under Section 61 of the Consumer Protection Act for the injuries sustained. The...

Citation
[2017] ZACGSO 2
Parties
Applicant: Complainant; Respondent: Supplier
Court
Consumer Goods and Services Ombud
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 April 2017
Case Number
201606-008042
Procedural Posture
Consumer Complaint / Assessment
Outcome
Complaint dismissed. No liability found against the Supplier.
Legal Topics
Consumer Protection Act, Defective Goods, Product Liability, Adequate Instructions, Manufacturer Liability
Commercial and Corporate Consumer Protection Act Defective Goods Product Liability Adequate Instructions Manufacturer 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Complainant

Applicant

Supplier

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consumer Complaint / Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the product was defective within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Supplier is liable for injuries sustained by the Complainant under Section 61 of the Consumer Protection Act.
  3. 3 Whether the Complainant followed the instructions and warnings provided with the product.

Ratio Decidendi

The Ombud found that the Complainant used the lawnmower contrary to the instructions and warnings provided in the manual, specifically by operating in wet grass and attempting to clear blockages without ensuring the machine was switched off. Both manuals submitted by the parties contained clear warnings against such conduct. The Complainant did not return the product for inspection, and the product has operated without fault since the incident. There was insufficient evidence to establish a defect in the product at the time of supply or inadequate instructions. Accordingly, the Supplier cannot be held liable under Section 61 of the Consumer Protection Act for the injuries sustained. The...

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed. No liability found against the Supplier.

Orders

  • The Supplier is not held liable for the injuries sustained by the Complainant.
  • No recommendation is made in favour of the Complainant.