Canada: Product Liability & Safety

Health Canada has introduced mandatory performance standards for consumer products containing button/coin batteries, requiring immediate compliance from manufacturers, importers, advertisers, and sellers. Companies must now certify that their products, packaging, and labelling meet specified safety criteria or equivalent standards to mitigate ingestion hazards. This regulatory update offers a more flexible, outcomes-based approach compared to the prescriptive requirements of Reese's Law in the United States

A Quebec Superior Court partially authorized a class action against 13 automakers over smart key vulnerabilities that enable relay attacks, raising critical questions about manufacturer liability for cybersecurity flaws and the extent of their duty to inform consumers about technology-related risks. The decision also breaks new ground by addressing whether AI-generated translations can be admitted as evidence in court proceedings.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal has left open the possibility that pharmaceutical manufacturers may owe a duty of care to develop safer alternatives to their existing products, even when those products are properly approved and labeled. This decision in Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. I.F. contrasts sharply with a recent California Supreme Court ruling that rejected such a "duty to innovate," potentially setting Canada on a divergent path in product liability law.

Hospital data shows a sharp rise in serious injuries from e-scooters and e-bikes among children, with boys aged 10-13 most affected and head injuries accounting for 36% of cases. Ontario law prohibits anyone under 16 from riding these devices, yet they remain widely available for purchase, creating a dangerous regulatory gap. When a child is injured, determining liability involves examining multiple parties including supervisors, retailers, manufacturers, and other road users.

Since 2019, Siskinds LLP has represented the plaintiffs in proposed JUUL class actions across Canada, alleging that the e-cigarette devices are hazardous products but were falsely marketed as a desirable, safe and healthier alternative to smoking. These Canadian lawsuits allege the defendants failed to properly inform Canadians, especially children, adolescents and young adults, of the dangers associated with the use of JUUL products.

The Omnipod insulin pump system, a widely-used device for diabetes management, faces serious medical device recalls due to manufacturing defects that can compromise insulin delivery. These defects may lead to severe health complications including hyperglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis, prompting legal investigations into potential claims against manufacturer Insulet Corporation. Canadian users of the recalled devices who have experienced serious health issues are urged to seek legal consultation regarding

A 2026 decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice reinforces a fundamental principle of Canadian product liability law...

On February 24, 2026, McCarthy Tétrault hosted our 16th annual Retail and Consumer Markets Summit. The program addressed some of the most critical issues affecting the retail and consumer markets space today...

Le droit canadien en matière de responsabilité du fabricant continue d'évoluer et, au cours de la dernière année, les tribunaux se sont penchés sur des questions liées aux défauts de conception et de fabrication, aux avertissements inadéquats et à la complexité croissante des chaînes d'approvisionnement modernes.