The plaintiffs sought damages after a house fire caused by failure of a motor within a heat recovery ventilator.
The court found that the appliance manufacturer negligently designed the unit by using cycling thermal protection without adequate system-level overcurrent protection or adequate end-of-life safety measures, and awarded property and non-pecuniary damages totalling $1,133,739.00.
The motor supplier was not liable because the motor itself was not defective, the appliance manufacturer bore responsibility for integrating the component safely into the finished product, and causation was not established on any alleged failure to warn.
The court also dismissed an issue estoppel motion based on prior Québec litigation and held that, if the component supplier had been liable, the contractual indemnity terms would have required indemnification by the appliance manufacturer.
