Chapter 9 - § 9.6 • INDUSTRY STANDARDS

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 9.6 • INDUSTRY STANDARDS

Compliance with industry standards is usually not considered a defense. Rather, it is a factor examined by the trier of fact in relation to issues such as the presence of a defect¹¹² and due care by the manufacturer.¹¹³ While compliance with industry standards tends to show due care by the manufacturer, it does not prove due care.¹¹⁴ Industry standards are usually admissible, and evidence regarding such standards is normally elicited through expert opinion.¹¹⁵

--------

Notes:

^[112] See Union Supply Co. v. Pust, 583 P.2d 276, 286 (Colo. 1978) ("the trier of fact is greatly dependent on expert evidence and industry standards in deciding whether a defect is present."); but see Belle Bonfils Mem'l Blood Bank, 665 P.2d at 126 n. 13 ("The use of trade customs may be permissible if the case were tried under negligence principles, but it is inconsistent with strict liability.").

^[113] United Blood Servs., 827 P.2d at 525 ("[Defendant]'s compliance with the Food and Drug Administration's recommendations and with the guidelines developed by the national blood banking community was some evidence of due care, but was not conclusive proof that additional precautions were not required.").

^[114] Id. ("[Defendant]'s compliance with the Food and Drug Administration's recommendations and with the guidelines developed by the national blood banking community was some evidence of due care, but was not conclusive proof that additional precautions were not required."); Yampa Valley Elec. Ass'n, Inc. v. Telecky, 862 P.2d 252, 257 (Colo. 1993) ("Evidence of a defendant's compliance with applicable industry standards in a tort case is both relevant and admissible for...