Facts
On June 8, 2001, X. used a V. brand coffee maker, model U., to prepare coffee. The glass carafe exploded, causing serious injuries to X.'s left hand. The coffee maker had been purchased in March 2000 at a store in Geneva. [Y. AG], the coffee maker's importer, had imported around 15,000 units of the same model into Switzerland in 1999. The coffee maker's instructions contained safety guidelines, including a warning not to place the carafe on a cold or wet surface when it is still hot.
X. sued [Y. AG] for 720,948.70 Swiss francs, plus interest, for actual damage, moral damages, and future damages. The Court of First Instance of the Canton of Geneva dismissed X.'s claims, a decision confirmed by the Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice. X. appealed the cantonal decision.
Considerations
Product liability is governed by the Federal Act of June 18, 1993, on Product Liability (PLA). Article 4 of the PLA defines a defective product as a product that does not offer the safety that can be reasonably expected, considering all circumstances. The expected safety is assessed objectively, based on the average consumer's safety expectations.
The cantonal court considered that X. had not proven the coffee maker's defect, as X. had not demonstrated the cause of the explosion. However, the PLA does not require the victim to prove the cause of the defect, but only that the product did not present the degree of safety that can be reasonably expected by the average consumer.
Proof of the defect can be established by preponderant likelihood, which assumes that important reasons…