Akhras v Bridgestone Australia Limited

In *Akhras v Bridgestone Australia Limited* [1995] NSWCA 11, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an appeal by the plaintiff, Mr Akhras, against a decision of the District Court. The dispute concerned the plaintiff's claim for damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of a defective tyre manufactured by the defendant, Bridgestone Australia Limited.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court had erred in finding that the plaintiff had failed to establish that the tyre in question was defective at the time it left the defendant's control. This involved a determination of whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support an inference of a manufacturing defect, notwithstanding the passage of time and the tyre's subsequent use.

The Court of Appeal analysed the evidence concerning the tyre's condition and the circumstances of its failure. It applied the legal principle that for a claim under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (specifically, s 74) or in negligence to succeed, the plaintiff must prove that the defect existed at the time the product was supplied. The Court found that the evidence did not exclude other potential causes for the tyre's failure, such as improper maintenance or road damage, and therefore, the inference of a manufacturing defect could not be reasonably drawn.

The appeal was dismissed, with the Court of Appeal affirming the decision of the District Court.