The High Court has set out a seven-stage process for what must be proved in a Consumer Protection Act 1987 claim.
Hufford v Samsung [2014] EWHC 2956 (TCC) involved a claim under the 1987 Act for damage caused to property when a fridge freezer caught fire.
The judge said there were seven points that must be considered in deciding what matters have to be proved, by whom, and how such matters are to be proved. First, the court must ask whether the case is a “closed list” as regards the cause of damage? In this case it was, since only two causes of fire were contended—the claimant’s view that an unspecified electrical fault in the appliance was the cause, and the defendant’s view that combustible material at the front of the appliance was set on fire as a result of cigarette smoking.
Other points to remember are that the burden of proof remains on the claimant throughout, that the court should not examine the rival contentions on the issue of causation, and that “the court is not required to embark upon a detailed analysis of precisely how the injury or peril was caused”.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
