Aventis Pasteur SA v OB; sub nom O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur SA C-358/08, [2009] All ER (D) 228 (Dec)
Article 11 of Council Directive (EEC) 85/374 precluded national legislation which allowed the substitution of one defendant for another during proceedings, from being applied in a way which permitted a “producer”, within the meaning of Art 3 of the Directive, to be sued, after the expiry of the period prescribed by that article, as defendant in proceedings brought within that period against another person.
However, first, Art 1 did not preclude a national court from holding that, in the proceedings instituted within the period prescribed by that article against the wholly-owned subsidiary of the “producer”, within the meaning of Art 3(1) of the Directive, that producer could be substituted for that subsidiary if that court found that the putting into circulation of the product in question was, in fact, determined by that producer.
Second, Art 3(3) of the Directive had to be interpreted as meaning that, where the person injured by an allegedly defective product was not reasonably able
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
