Tennant, Sarah-lynnVan Heerden, C.M. (Corlia)2025-04-162025-04-162024-10Tennant, S.-L. & Van Heerden, C. Product Liability in an Age of Development Risks: Should South Africa Reconsider Adopting a Development Risk Defence? Journal of African Law. 2024; 68(3): 359-377. doi:10.1017/S0021855323000360.0021-8553 (print)1464-3731 (online)10.1017/S0021855323000360http://hdl.handle.net/2263/102120To provide protection against harm caused by defective, unsafe products and to promote product safety, the law of product liability has developed as a specialized area of the law of delict (tort). The vexing question is, who should bear such liability? This contribution interrogates the notorious EU development risk defence, which exonerates manufacturers that meet certain stringent requirements for undiscoverable development risks in products that consequently inflict harm on consumers. In particular, it considers the election by South Africa, which recently adopted a “strict” product liability regime with the introduction of the Consumer Protection Act 2008, not to adopt such a defence. The purpose of this contribution is to consider the nature and scope of the development risk defence as contained in article 7(e) of the European Union (EU) Product Liability Directive and to determine whether it was prudent for South Africa to steer clear of incorporating a similar defence in its new statutory product liability regime.en© University of Pretoria, 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS, University of London.Defective productsDevelopmental riskDevelopmental risk defenceHybrid regimeProduct liabilityStrict liabilitySDG-12: Responsible consumption and productionSDG-16: Peace, justice and strong institutionsPostprint Article