The liability of notified bodies under the EU’s new approach

The implications of the PIP breast implants case

Paul Verbruggen, Barend Van Leeuwen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

In this article, we analyse the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment in Schmitt, a preliminary reference concerning the potential liability of the notified body TÜV Rheinland vis-à-vis women who had received breast implants produced by the French manufacturer Poly Implant Prothèse SA (PIP). Our discussion focuses on (1) the impact of the judgment on the damages actions that women have brought against TÜV Rheinland before national courts; (2) the future regulation of medical devices in the EU; and (3) the regulation of private standardisation and certification in EU law. We argue that Schmitt can be seen as part of a broader trend in the case law of the CJEU, in which private regulatory activities are gradually submitted to fundamental principles of EU law. While this “constitutionalisation” of private regulation strengthens the public accountability of these alternative forms of regulation, it also poses fundamental challenges to their current design and internal governance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)394-409
Number of pages16
JournalEuropean Law Review
Volume43
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018

Fingerprint

liability
EU
regulation
European Law
case law
certification
damages
governance
responsibility
trend

Cite this

@article{f865ba22e5f5439480f22369ba89e0fd,
title = "The liability of notified bodies under the EU’s new approach: The implications of the PIP breast implants case",
abstract = "In this article, we analyse the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment in Schmitt, a preliminary reference concerning the potential liability of the notified body T{\"U}V Rheinland vis-{\`a}-vis women who had received breast implants produced by the French manufacturer Poly Implant Proth{\`e}se SA (PIP). Our discussion focuses on (1) the impact of the judgment on the damages actions that women have brought against T{\"U}V Rheinland before national courts; (2) the future regulation of medical devices in the EU; and (3) the regulation of private standardisation and certification in EU law. We argue that Schmitt can be seen as part of a broader trend in the case law of the CJEU, in which private regulatory activities are gradually submitted to fundamental principles of EU law. While this “constitutionalisation” of private regulation strengthens the public accountability of these alternative forms of regulation, it also poses fundamental challenges to their current design and internal governance.",
author = "Paul Verbruggen and {Van Leeuwen}, Barend",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "394--409",
journal = "European Law Review",
issn = "0307-5400",
publisher = "Sweet and Maxwell Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

The liability of notified bodies under the EU’s new approach : The implications of the PIP breast implants case. / Verbruggen, Paul; Van Leeuwen, Barend.

In: European Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 3, 06.2018, p. 394-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The liability of notified bodies under the EU’s new approach

T2 - The implications of the PIP breast implants case

AU - Verbruggen, Paul

AU - Van Leeuwen, Barend

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - In this article, we analyse the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment in Schmitt, a preliminary reference concerning the potential liability of the notified body TÜV Rheinland vis-à-vis women who had received breast implants produced by the French manufacturer Poly Implant Prothèse SA (PIP). Our discussion focuses on (1) the impact of the judgment on the damages actions that women have brought against TÜV Rheinland before national courts; (2) the future regulation of medical devices in the EU; and (3) the regulation of private standardisation and certification in EU law. We argue that Schmitt can be seen as part of a broader trend in the case law of the CJEU, in which private regulatory activities are gradually submitted to fundamental principles of EU law. While this “constitutionalisation” of private regulation strengthens the public accountability of these alternative forms of regulation, it also poses fundamental challenges to their current design and internal governance.

AB - In this article, we analyse the consequences of the CJEU’s judgment in Schmitt, a preliminary reference concerning the potential liability of the notified body TÜV Rheinland vis-à-vis women who had received breast implants produced by the French manufacturer Poly Implant Prothèse SA (PIP). Our discussion focuses on (1) the impact of the judgment on the damages actions that women have brought against TÜV Rheinland before national courts; (2) the future regulation of medical devices in the EU; and (3) the regulation of private standardisation and certification in EU law. We argue that Schmitt can be seen as part of a broader trend in the case law of the CJEU, in which private regulatory activities are gradually submitted to fundamental principles of EU law. While this “constitutionalisation” of private regulation strengthens the public accountability of these alternative forms of regulation, it also poses fundamental challenges to their current design and internal governance.

UR - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3038830

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 394

EP - 409

JO - European Law Review

JF - European Law Review

SN - 0307-5400

IS - 3

ER -