The appellant valve manufacturer appealed from a Divisional Court order upholding partial refusal of summary judgment in a product liability action arising from a propane explosion and fire.
The Court of Appeal held that on a defendant's motion for summary judgment, the responding plaintiffs bore an evidentiary burden to show their negligent design and failure to warn claims were factually supported.
Applying the design defect framework, the court found no evidence identifying any defect in the valve or any safer economically feasible alternative design.
The failure to warn claim also failed because there was no evidence of an inherent danger known or knowable to the manufacturer.
The appeal was allowed and the claims against the manufacturer were dismissed in their entirety.
