27.4.2015
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 138/9
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Boston Scientific Medizintechnik GmbH v AOK Sachsen-Anhalt (C-503/13), Betriebskrankenkasse RWE (C-504/13)
(Joined Cases C-503/13 and C-504/13) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Liability for damage caused by defective products - Directive 85/374/EEC - Articles 1, 6(1) and section (a) of the first paragraph of Article 9 - Pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators - Risk of product failure - Personal injury - Removal of the allegedly defective product and replacement with another product - Reimbursement of the costs of the operation))
(2015/C 138/11)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Bundesgerichtshof
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Boston Scientific Medizintechnik GmbH
Defendants: AOK Sachsen-Anhalt (C-503/13), Betriebskrankenkasse RWE (C-504/13)
Operative part of the judgment
1)
Article 6(1) of Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products must be interpreted as meaning that, where it is found that products belonging to the same group or forming part of the same production series, such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, have a potential defect, such a product may be classified as defective without there being any need to establish that that product has such a defect.
2)
Article 1 and section (a) of the first paragraph of Article 9 of Directive 85/374 are to be interpreted as meaning that the damage caused by a surgical operation for the replacement of a defective product, such as a pacemaker or an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, constitutes ‘damage caused by death or personal injuries’ for which the producer is liable, if such an operation is necessary to overcome the defect in the product in question. It is for the national court to verify whether that condition is satisfied in the main proceedings.
(1) OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy