Love v Halfords Ltd
2014
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
UK
CORAM
- SIR COLIN MACKAY
Areas of Law
- Commercial Law
- Tort Law
2014
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Joseph Love claimed damages for injuries allegedly caused by a defect in his mountain bike under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 and other statutes. The case centered on whether a fracture in the bike's steerer tube caused the accident. The court applied principles from prior case law on the burden of proof and the need to eliminate other possible causes. Based on technical and expert evidence, the court concluded that the steerer tube was damaged and incompetently repaired prior to the accident, ruling out a defect at the point of sale. Consequently, the claim was dismissed.
Judgment
SIR COLIN MACKAY:
On 26 May 2008 the claimant, who was then 19 bought a new Saracen “Raw 2” mountain bicycle from the defendants for £250, plus £50 for a three year care maintenance plan. He returned it for a routine after-sales service on 23 August 2008. Nothing untoward was found.
On 28 February 2009 when he was riding the bike on a tarmac cycle path next to the A2 Road in Kent he says that the steerer tube in the mechanism of the bike fractured, causing him to lose control of the bike and he fell from it. He landed on his face striking a sharp metal stanchion and suffered very serious head and facial injuries including the loss of one of his eyes. Because of his injuries he has no recollection of the accident or his journey leading up to it.
His evidence is that over the nine months or so over which he had owned the bicycle he used it regularly for short journeys to and from his place of work and for recreational trips with his friends at weekends. He had effected no alterations or repairs to the bicycle of any kind.
This is the trial of the liability issue in his claim for damages under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 , the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 .
The Law
The Consumer Protection Act 1987 in its relevant parts reads as follows:
“2 Liability for defective products
Subject to the following provisions of this Part where any damage is caused wholly or partly by a defect in a product every person to whom sub-section (2) below applies shall be liable for the damage.
[It is common ground that the defendant as supplier of this bicycle is a person to whom sub-section (2) applies.]
3 Meaning of ‘defect’
(1) Subject to the following provisions in this section there is a defect in a product for the purposes of this Part if the safety of the product is not such as persons generally are entitled to expect…
(2) In determining for the purposes of sub-section (1) above what persons generally are entitled to expect in relation to a product all the circumstances shall be taken into account, including –
(a) the manner in which and the purposes for which the product has been marketed…
(b) what might reasonably be expected to be done with or in relation to the product.
4- Defences
(1) in any civil proceedings by virtue of this Part against any person (‘the person proceeded against’) in respect of a defect in a product it shall be a defence for him to show …
(d) that the defect did not e