- 12, 17, 2021
- Comments Off on Updated product safety mandatory reporting guidance for suppliers now available
- By Dr Will Higgs PhD, Barrister
- Products Liability
Updated product safety mandatory reporting guidance for suppliers now available
Today the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) published its updated Mandatory Reporting Guideline to help businesses understand and comply with their mandatory reporting obligations. The updated guideline also recommends voluntary reporting of incidents that do not meet the mandatory reporting requirements, such as near misses, to help provide the ACCC with an early indication […]
Read More
- 08, 05, 2020
- Comments Off on Over 155,000 cars with deadly Takata airbags still on the roads says ACCC
- By Dr Will Higgs PhD, Barrister
- Products Liability
Over 155,000 cars with deadly Takata airbags still on the roads says ACCC
According to ACCC’s Product Safety Australia (31 July 2020 https://www.productsafety.gov.au/news/over-155000-cars-with-deadly-takata-airbags-still-on-the-roads) at least 155,000 vehicles containing potentially deadly Takata airbags are still on our roads and with less than six months before manufacturers are expected to complete their recall of these vehicles, the ACCC is urging consumers to check if their vehicles are affected and if […]
Read More
- 04, 03, 2016
- Comments Off on Product liability
- By whiggs
- Aviation law, Engineering Law, Fracture and Fatigue, Other
Product liability
Source: www.fasterway.com.au This is a typical fracture surface. This is a threaded connection (hence the appearance of a depression around the circumference). The fracture surface was smooth, flat, and perpendicular to the principal axis of the bolt. Crack progression marks (beach marks) extended radially from one side of the bolt and covered approximately 90% of the fracture […]
Read More
- 09, 13, 2015
- Comments Off on Failure to pass a Standard does not of itself establish negligence
- By whiggs
- Other, Products Liability
Failure to pass a Standard does not of itself establish negligence
Garrett v Hills Industries [2006] QDC 299 – Even if a device of product failed to pass all relevant tests of the Australian standard, this would not, of itself, establish negligence: O’Connor v Hansen Wilckens Hornibook Constructions Ltd (1968) 42 ALJR 239; Crisa v John Shearer Ltd (1981) 27 SASR 422 at 428. Failure to follow […]
Read MoreSEARCH BLOG POSTS
LATEST BLOG POSTS
- Updated product safety mandatory reporting guidance for suppliers now available
- Pleading fraud – cause and effect is essential
- Does the Trustee’s right of indemnity have priority over the right of beneficiaries in relation to assets?
- Rules of war (in a nutshell) | The Laws Of War
- MH370 Final Report
Past Blog Posts
- December 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- August 2020
- February 2020
- September 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- July 2018
- April 2018
- December 2017
- May 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- January 2014
Categories
- Appeals
- Artificial Intelligence
- Aviation law
- Banking and Finance Law
- Blogs
- Civil Liability Act
- Class Actions
- Coding for lawyers
- common law
- Consumer Claims (TPA)
- Contract Law
- Contractual Interpretation
- Criminal law
- Deeds
- Docassemble
- duty of care
- Engineering Law
- Equity
- Evidence
- Exclusion Clauses
- Execution of documents
- Expert Witness
- featured
- Financial Services
- Fraud
- Fundraising (Chapter 6D)
- General comment
- Home Building Law
- Insurance
- Legal drafting
- Local Court
- Medical Negligence
- MH370
- Motor Accidents
- Negligence
- Occupiers negligence
- Other
- Personal Injury
- Personal Property Securities (PPSA)
- Pleading
- Practice & Procedure
- Products Liability
- Property
- Real Property
- Reasons for a decision
- Securitisation
- Security (Mortgages & Charges)
- Sentencing
- Swaps & Derivatives
- Teaching
- Transactional Law
- Transfer of financial assets in transactions
- Trusts & Trustee Law
- Uncategorized
- War and Weaponry
- Witnesses
SEARCH BLOG POSTS
LATEST BLOG POSTS
- Updated product safety mandatory reporting guidance for suppliers now available
- Pleading fraud – cause and effect is essential
- Does the Trustee’s right of indemnity have priority over the right of beneficiaries in relation to assets?
- Rules of war (in a nutshell) | The Laws Of War
- MH370 Final Report
Past Blog Posts
- December 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- August 2020
- February 2020
- September 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- July 2018
- April 2018
- December 2017
- May 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- January 2014
Categories
- Appeals
- Artificial Intelligence
- Aviation law
- Banking and Finance Law
- Blogs
- Civil Liability Act
- Class Actions
- Coding for lawyers
- common law
- Consumer Claims (TPA)
- Contract Law
- Contractual Interpretation
- Criminal law
- Deeds
- Docassemble
- duty of care
- Engineering Law
- Equity
- Evidence
- Exclusion Clauses
- Execution of documents
- Expert Witness
- featured
- Financial Services
- Fraud
- Fundraising (Chapter 6D)
- General comment
- Home Building Law
- Insurance
- Legal drafting
- Local Court
- Medical Negligence
- MH370
- Motor Accidents
- Negligence
- Occupiers negligence
- Other
- Personal Injury
- Personal Property Securities (PPSA)
- Pleading
- Practice & Procedure
- Products Liability
- Property
- Real Property
- Reasons for a decision
- Securitisation
- Security (Mortgages & Charges)
- Sentencing
- Swaps & Derivatives
- Teaching
- Transactional Law
- Transfer of financial assets in transactions
- Trusts & Trustee Law
- Uncategorized
- War and Weaponry
- Witnesses