A Tamworth resident has received substantial* monetary damages following the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's first product liability representative action.
In the Federal Court in Sydney, Justice Emmett yesterday gave final orders which awarded damages to Mr Michael Barnes after finding Glendale Chemical Products Pty Ltd, the manufacturer and supplier of Glendale Caustic Soda, liable for injuries and damage suffered by Mr Barnes.
Mr Barnes suffered burns to his face and both eyes when he was hit by a column of water containing caustic soda. Caustic soda is an extremely reactive alkali which releases considerable heat when dissolved in water.
Mr Barnes had poured boiling water through the chrome cover of his shower recess waste pipe before sprinkling approximately one third of a 500g pack of Glendale Chemicals Pty Ltd Caustic Soda (sodium hydroxide) down his bathroom drain hole.
Bringing an action under the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act for the first time, the ACCC had alleged that the instructions and warnings on the products label were inadequate as to its use.
Justice Emmett declared the warning labelling affixed to the caustic soda containers insufficient.
"The nature of the product and the purpose for which it was marked entitled consumers to expect to be warned of the danger or lack of safety in respect of which goods might reasonably be expected to be put," he said. "The description of the method for using caustic soda ... contains no hint of warning that caustic soda should only be used in that way for cleaning drains. While there is a warning that the contents of the container are corrosive and that contact with eyes and skin should be avoided, that is not adequate having regard to the nature of caustic soda and the purpose for which it was marked."
Justice Emmett also said the suggested usage of the product "cannot be construed as a warning by the supplier that that is the only way in which it should be used. I do not consider that use in the way in which it was used was unreasonable."
The orders given by Justice Emmett included amendments to the labelling of the product as to its instructions for use. A significant amendment to the labelling was that undissolved caustic soda should not be poured or used in any confined space such as a drain as the caustic soda may erupt violently.
ACCC Chairman, Professor Allan Fels, said the case was a warning for manufacturers.
"It is important for manufacturers, suppliers and importers of consumer products to be aware of the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act. Suppliers who re-package and brand the product with their name or logo are deemed as manufacturers under the Act. Likewise Importers are also deemed as manufacturers. Manufacturers need to be educated that consumer products which they know or should know are inherently dangerous or potentially unsafe, should have sufficient warnings and instructions as to their safe use."
Glendale Chemicals Pty Ltd had at an interlocutory stage given a court undertaking to amend its product labelling to clearly notify consumers of necessary safety precautions and direct consumers in their use of the product.
*At the request of the consumer, the amount of damages is not being revealed by the ACCC.
In the Federal Court in Sydney, Justice Emmett yesterday gave final orders which awarded damages to Mr Michael Barnes after finding Glendale Chemical Products Pty Ltd, the manufacturer and supplier of Glendale Caustic Soda, liable for injuries and damage suffered by Mr Barnes.
Mr Barnes suffered burns to his face and both eyes when he was hit by a column of water containing caustic soda. Caustic soda is an extremely reactive alkali which releases considerable heat when dissolved in water.
Mr Barnes had poured boiling water through the chrome cover of his shower recess waste pipe before sprinkling approximately one third of a 500g pack of Glendale Chemicals Pty Ltd Caustic Soda (sodium hydroxide) down his bathroom drain hole.
Bringing an action under the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act for the first time, the ACCC had alleged that the instructions and warnings on the products label were inadequate as to its use.
Justice Emmett declared the warning labelling affixed to the caustic soda containers insufficient.
"The nature of the product and the purpose for which it was marked entitled consumers to expect to be warned of the danger or lack of safety in respect of which goods might reasonably be expected to be put," he said. "The description of the method for using caustic soda ... contains no hint of warning that caustic soda should only be used in that way for cleaning drains. While there is a warning that the contents of the container are corrosive and that contact with eyes and skin should be avoided, that is not adequate having regard to the nature of caustic soda and the purpose for which it was marked."
Justice Emmett also said the suggested usage of the product "cannot be construed as a warning by the supplier that that is the only way in which it should be used. I do not consider that use in the way in which it was used was unreasonable."
The orders given by Justice Emmett included amendments to the labelling of the product as to its instructions for use. A significant amendment to the labelling was that undissolved caustic soda should not be poured or used in any confined space such as a drain as the caustic soda may erupt violently.
ACCC Chairman, Professor Allan Fels, said the case was a warning for manufacturers.
"It is important for manufacturers, suppliers and importers of consumer products to be aware of the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act. Suppliers who re-package and brand the product with their name or logo are deemed as manufacturers under the Act. Likewise Importers are also deemed as manufacturers. Manufacturers need to be educated that consumer products which they know or should know are inherently dangerous or potentially unsafe, should have sufficient warnings and instructions as to their safe use."
Glendale Chemicals Pty Ltd had at an interlocutory stage given a court undertaking to amend its product labelling to clearly notify consumers of necessary safety precautions and direct consumers in their use of the product.
*At the request of the consumer, the amount of damages is not being revealed by the ACCC.