FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Diane Bandon-Tourret and Agathe Clarac, LexCase
uct’s safety defect precluded the development risk exemption from being invoked (Civ. 1re, 6 December 2023, F-D, No 22-21.238). Otherwise, the defect is due to the product’s compliance with mandatory legislative or regu - latory rules. The producer of the component part is also not liable if he/she establishes that the defect is attributable to the design of the product in which that part has been incorporated or to the instruc - tions given by the producer of that product. The producer’s liability may be reduced or elimi - nated, having regard to all the circumstances, where the damage is caused jointly by a defect in the product and by the fault of the victim or of a person for whom the victim is responsible. In a serial case concerning PIP prostheses, it was held that the certifying body could be held liable, insofar as it should have carried out unan - nounced inspections or inspections motivated by factual circumstances, which could have enabled it to detect the defectiveness of the product (Cour de Cassation, 31 January 2024 No 22-22.619; Cour de Cassation, 1st, 5 June 2024 No 2312854). In matters of tort, the defendant may be exoner - ated in the event of fault on the part of the victim or force majeure. 2.13 The Impact of Regulatory Compliance on Product Liability Claims Regarding product liability, the producer is auto - matically liable unless he/she can prove that the defect is due to the product’s compliance with mandatory legislative or regulatory rules. It should be emphasised, however, that the pro - ducer may be liable for the defect even though
the product was manufactured in compliance with the rules of the trade or existing stand - ards, or if it was the subject of an administrative authorisation. Compliance with regulatory requirements may also be asserted by the defendant in an action based on tort if the alleged fault consists of a breach of the regulations. 2.14 Rules for Payment of Costs in Product Liability Claims In matters of liability and at the end of the pro - ceedings, the costs incurred may, under cer - tain conditions, be charged to the unsuccessful party. Article 695 of the Code of Civil Procedure lists the costs. Indeed, costs include notably: • bailiff’s fees incurred in serving the summons, pleadings and judgment; • the taxable fees of the lawyers appearing in the case, where their involvement is com - pulsory, calculated on the basis of the value in dispute and made up of the fixed fee, the proportional fee and the graduated fee; • the costs of judicial expertise; and • compensation received by the winning party’s lawyer under the legal aid scheme. In his/her decision, the judge will rule on the costs in accordance notably with the provisions of Article 696 of the Code of Civil Procedure: • the losing party must pay the costs; or • by reasoned decision, he/she may order that all or part of the costs be borne by another party (in particular where a party is only partially successful, or in view of the nature of the dispute).
82
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook