CCQ-1991 - Civil Code of Québec

Full text
1473. The manufacturer, distributor or supplier of a movable thing is not bound to make reparation for injury caused by a safety defect in the thing if he proves that the victim knew or could have known of the defect, or could have foreseen the injury.
Nor is he bound to make reparation if he proves that, according to the state of knowledge at the time that he manufactured, distributed or supplied the thing, the existence of the defect could not have been known, and that he was not neglectful of his duty to provide information when he became aware of the defect.
1991, c. 64, a. 1473; 2002, c. 19, s. 15; I.N. 2014-05-01; I.N. 2015-11-01.
1473. The manufacturer, distributor or supplier of a movable thing is not bound to make reparation for injury caused by a safety defect in it if he proves that the victim knew or could have known of the defect, or could have foreseen the injury.
Nor is he bound to make reparation if he proves that, according to the state of knowledge at the time that he manufactured, distributed or supplied the thing, the existence of the defect could not have been known, and that he was not neglectful of his duty to provide information when he became aware of the defect.
1991, c. 64, a. 1473; 2002, c. 19, s. 15; I.N. 2014-05-01.
1473. The manufacturer, distributor or supplier of a movable property is not liable to reparation for injury caused by a safety defect in the property if he proves that the victim knew or could have known of the defect, or could have foreseen the injury.
Nor is he liable to reparation if he proves that, according to the state of knowledge at the time that he manufactured, distributed or supplied the property, the existence of the defect could not have been known, and that he was not neglectful of his duty to provide information when he became aware of the defect.
1991, c. 64, a. 1473; 2002, c. 19, s. 15.
1473. The manufacturer, distributor or supplier of a movable property is not liable to reparation for injury caused by a safety defect in the property if he proves that the victim knew or could have known of the defect, or could have foreseen the injury.
Nor is he liable to reparation if he proves that, according to the state of knowledge at the time that he manufactured, distributed or supplied the property, the existence of the defect could not have been known, or that he was not neglectful of his duty to provide information when he became aware of the defect.
1991, c. 64, a. 1473.