[Home](/)/[Resources](/resources)/Consumer Protection Act 1987

United KingdomProduct LiabilityLegal

# Consumer Protection Act 1987: Strict Product Liability for Hardware Companies in the UK

Part I of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 imposes strict liability on producers of defective products — meaning any hardware company whose product injures a person or damages their property in the UK faces a claim without the claimant needing to prove negligence. Understanding who is a producer, what makes a product defective, and what defences exist is essential before you place a single unit on the GB market.

Copy Link[Share on WhatsApp](https://wa.me/?text=https%3A%2F%2Fkrono-labs.com%2Fguides%2Fuk-consumer-protection-act-1987)

At a glance

Act reference

CPA 1987 Part I

Producer definition

s1(2) — manufacturer, own brander, first UK importer

Property damage threshold

£275 minimum

Long-stop period

10 years from first supply (s11A)

## Key concepts under the Consumer Protection Act 1987

### Who is a 'Producer' under CPA 1987 s1(2)

The Act casts its net wide. A producer is the actual manufacturer, any person who holds themselves out as the manufacturer by affixing their name or mark to the product (the 'own brander' trap), and the first importer of the product into the United Kingdom from outside. This means a UK company that badges a product made overseas with its own trade mark becomes a producer in full — with the same strict liability exposure as the factory that built it.

### Strict Liability — No Negligence Required

Under Part I of the CPA 1987, a claimant need not prove that the producer was careless. The claimant must establish only three elements: the product was defective within the meaning of s3, the damage complained of was caused by the defect, and the defendant falls within the definition of producer, own brander, or first importer. This is a materially lower burden than a common law negligence claim.

### The 'Defective' Test under s3 — Consumer Expectations

A product is defective if its safety is not such as persons generally are entitled to expect. This objective test takes into account all circumstances, including the manner of marketing, any instructions and warnings, what might reasonably be expected to be done with the product, and the time of supply. A product sold as a professional-grade tool will be assessed against professional expectations — context matters significantly.

### The Development Risks Defence — s4(1)(e)

A producer escapes liability if it can prove that the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the relevant time was not such that a producer of products of the same description as the product in question might be expected to have discovered the defect. This is a high bar: 'the state of the art' must genuinely have precluded discovery, not merely that the specific producer was unaware. Knowledge published anywhere in the world — in any language — can be attributed to the hypothetical informed producer.

### Recoverable Damage and the £275 Property Threshold

Claimants may recover for death, personal injury, and property damage. However, property damage claims are subject to a threshold: no compensation is available for the first £275 of any property damage claim, and purely commercial or business property is excluded (only private property is covered). Pure economic loss — lost profits, consequential financial loss — is not recoverable under the CPA 1987 strict liability regime at all.

### Limitation Periods — 3 Years and the 10-Year Long-Stop

The primary limitation period for a CPA claim is three years from the date the claimant had knowledge of the damage, the defect, and the identity of the producer — broadly aligned with the Limitation Act 1980 personal injury rules. Critically, s11A imposes a ten-year long-stop running from the date the producer first supplied the product: no action can be brought after this period, regardless of when the claimant acquired knowledge.

## Managing CPA 1987 exposure: a practical process

01

Map every product placed on the UK market against the CPA 1987 s1(2) producer definition — manufacturer, own brander, and first UK importer — to identify all entities carrying strict liability exposure.

02

Audit own-branding arrangements: any product carrying your company's name, logo, or trade mark that was made by a third party makes your company a 'producer' for CPA purposes. Ensure supply contracts with the actual manufacturer include robust indemnity obligations.

03

Review each product's technical file and risk assessment documentation to confirm the product meets the objective safety standard that persons generally are entitled to expect under s3. Gap any risk assessment that pre-dates a product design change.

04

Establish record retention policies requiring that manufacturing specifications, batch records, test reports, and supply chain records are kept for a minimum of ten years from first supply — matching the long-stop limitation period under s11A.

05

Draft comprehensive contractual indemnities in manufacturer and supplier agreements. Where the manufacturer is overseas, ensure the indemnity is governed by English law and that the manufacturer maintains adequate product liability insurance.

06

Secure product liability insurance that expressly covers strict liability claims under the Consumer Protection Act 1987. Confirm the policy covers own-branded products and check that the limit of indemnity reflects your actual volume of UK sales.

07

Implement a post-market surveillance programme with documented procedures for monitoring field incidents, consumer complaints, and emerging safety data. A product risk that becomes discoverable post-launch but pre-supply may defeat a development risks defence for later supply.

08

Familiarise legal and compliance teams with the Product Safety and Metrology Act 2024, which sits alongside CPA 1987 Part I. The PSaMA 2024 creates additional compliance and enforcement obligations but does not repeal the CPA 1987 strict liability regime.

## Frequently asked questions

### Does a company that imports a branded product into the UK become liable under the CPA 1987?

Yes — the first person to import the product into the United Kingdom from a country outside the UK is treated as a 'producer' under s1(2)(c) of the CPA 1987. This means a UK importer of goods manufactured outside the UK carries the same strict liability exposure as the manufacturer itself. Where the actual manufacturer is domiciled outside the UK, the importer is often the defendant of first resort in CPA claims, as they are easily identifiable and UK-domiciled. This is a common and significant trap for UK distribution businesses.

### What is the development risks defence and when does it apply?

The development risks defence under s4(1)(e) of the CPA 1987 permits a producer to avoid liability where the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time the product was supplied was not such that any producer of products of the same description could have been expected to discover the defect. It is not enough that the particular producer did not know — the entire body of global knowledge must have been incapable of revealing the defect. It is most relevant to novel materials or chemicals where a hazard was genuinely unknown at the time of supply. Courts interpret it narrowly; undiscoverable must mean truly undiscoverable, not merely difficult or expensive to discover.

### How is CPA 1987 strict liability different from a negligence claim?

In a negligence claim, the claimant must prove that the producer owed a duty of care, that it breached that duty by failing to take reasonable care, that the breach caused the damage, and that the damage was a foreseeable consequence. Under the CPA 1987, duty and breach analysis is entirely absent. The claimant proves only that the product was defective, that the defect caused the damage, and that the defendant is a producer. This makes CPA claims structurally easier to bring — particularly where the claimant cannot identify what the manufacturer did wrong, only that the product failed.

### Has UK product liability law changed since Brexit?

CPA 1987 Part I implemented the EC Product Liability Directive 85/374/EEC and remains in force unchanged. The EU has since replaced that directive with Directive 2024/2853/EU, which extends liability to software, digital products, and circular economy refurbished goods. The UK has not implemented the 2024 EU Directive — it applies only in EU member states. The UK government has, however, enacted the Product Safety and Metrology Act 2024, which reforms market surveillance and enforcement without replacing the strict liability regime in CPA Part I. UK and EU product liability law are therefore now diverging.

**Disclaimer:** Educational resource only. UK regulatory requirements change. Consult a qualified UK solicitor or compliance specialist before making decisions.

[

Map your product, free

Every standard, document, and test that applies — free, no account required.

Start mapping](/platform/start)

Learn this properly

In-depth course that teaches the full process, not just this one answer.

[Start the course — $149](/courses/09-ukca-marking-for-electronics-products)[Prefer to read? Get the book — $24.99](/books/09-ukca-marking-for-electronics-products)

Related guides

*   [UK Product Liability ReformUK Product Liability reform post-Brexit: proposed updates to the Consumer Protection Act 1987, software and digital product liability extension, AI-generated product defect liability, and implications for electronics hardware companies selling into Great Britain.](/guides/uk-product-liability-reform)
*   [UK General Product Safety RegulationsThe GB 2005 general-safety baseline versus the newer EU GPSR that Northern Ireland follows.](/guides/uk-general-product-safety-regulations)
*   [UK Warranty & Consumer Rights ActStatutory warranty and returns rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.](/guides/uk-warranty-consumer-rights-act)
*   [UK Product Safety and Metrology BillThe UK Product Safety and Metrology Bill (PSMB) updates Great Britain's product safety framework post-GPSR: OPSS enforcement powers, online marketplace duties, and GB designated standards.](/guides/uk-product-safety-metrology-bill)
*   [US Product Liability Law for HardwareThe three theories of US product liability - strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty - applied to electronics, and the engineering documentation, warranty language, and post-market surveillance practices that reduce exposure.](/guides/us-product-liability-law)