Plaintiff (a child) was able to open what was supposed to be a child-resistant bottle of washing powder sold by Tesco’s and the bottle manufactured by another company (Defendant 1 and Defendant 2).
Plaintiff ate the powder and was ill and Defendants were sued on his behalf.
The company found Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 liable under the 1987 Act.
The case came down to s.3(1) of the act, that:
There is a defect in a product for the purposes of this Part if the safety of the product is not such as persons generally are entitled to expect …
Here, the public were entitled to expect that the bottle would be, more difficult to open than a standard bottle top, which it was.
Therefore the product was not defective.