A v. National Blood Authority
England and Wales High Court of Justice
3 All ER 289 (2001)
- Written by Emily Laird, JD
Facts
One hundred fourteen British claimants (the claimants) (plaintiffs) sued 14 regional blood-transfusion centers administered by the Royal Health Authority (collectively, Royal Health) (defendants) for injuries arising from blood transfusions contaminated with hepatitis C. The claimants raised claims in the high court of justice under the European Union’s Product Liability Directive of 1985 (the directive), which was implemented in the United Kingdom through the Consumer Protection Act of 1987 (the act). The claimants argued that under the directive’s consumer-expectation test, Royal Health was strictly liable for the claimants’ injuries from defective blood products after the act came into effect in 1988. Royal Health argued it was not liable, because the hepatitis C virus was not even discovered until 1989 and there were no tests available to screen for the virus at the time of the infusions that caused the claimants’ injuries.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Burton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
