A manufacturer's duty of care to consumers is to take reasonable care to avoid physical injury, not a duty to warn. References to a 'duty to warn' in trial proceedings are properly understood as shorthand for the central issue of breach, not as the content of the duty itself. Even if a trial judge formulates the duty at an overly specific level, this will not constitute an error of law if the judge's reasons as a whole show the issue was determined as one of breach. Where the manufacturer's knowledge of risks is in dispute, any error in adopting a specific duty content is an error of fact, not law. In straightforward failure-to-warn cases involving manufacturers, the Wyong Shire Council v Shirt evaluation does not require the same level of detailed analysis as in more complex cases such as those involving retailers.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.