When “Safe” Products Fail: Trampoline Injury Liability
In this product liability episode of P.I. Case Note, we examine the Queensland Supreme Court decision in Forostenko v Springfree Trampoline Australia Pty Ltd [2024] QSC 1, which addresses safety defects under the Australian Consumer Law and the Competition and Consumer Law Act 2010 (Cth). The case demonstrates how even products marketed as “safe” can be found defective when they cause serious injuries.
The court’s analysis of safety defects, credibility, and expert opinions provides crucial insights into product liability claims under both federal consumer law and the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld). This decision shows how manufacturers who market products based on safety features face heightened scrutiny when those products cause harm. The judgment emphasises that expert evidence and credibility assessments play crucial roles in determining whether a product’s design or warnings were adequate to protect consumers from foreseeable risks.
Listen below for our comprehensive analysis of this product liability decision. If you or your child has been injured by a defective product, even one marketed as safe, you may have rights to compensation. Contact accident legal for a free consultation—we understand product liability law and can help determine whether defective design, manufacturing, or warnings contributed to your injury.
