top of page

Understanding Consumer Guarantees: Dwyer v Volkswagen Case Study

The case of Dwyer v Volkswagen serves as a pivotal point of reference in the realm of Australian Consumer Law.


As vehicles become more technologically advanced and supply chains more intricate, legal interpretations must evolve to safeguard consumer rights and define manufacturer responsibilities. This case delves deep into concepts like "acceptable quality," the implications of third-party component failures, and nuanced damage assessments.


Highlighting the dynamic nature of the Australian Consumer Law, our analysis of the case provides invaluable insights for both consumers and manufacturers. If you find yourself navigating the complexities of consumer law or require professional assistance in such matters, please don't hesitate to contact us.

A logo white transparrent.png

Dwyer v Volkswagen Group Australia Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 211

Executive Summary


The recent case of Dwyer v Volkswagen Group Australia Pty Ltd clarified several pivotal points. This analysis delves into the judgment and offers insights into what it means for consumers and manufacturers.

Legal Principles in Question

The case sat within the purview of the Australian Consumer Law, most notably, the issue of "acceptable quality", defences available to manufacturers, and the nuances surrounding the assessment of damages in the realm of product defects.

Case Summary

At the core of this dispute were Takata Corporation-produced airbags using phase-stabilised ammonium nitrate (PSAN). Despite VW's initial safety assurance, these airbags led to a widespread recall in 2018. Prof Dwyer challenged VW's compliance with the Australian Consumer Law's "acceptable quality" guarantee concerning the potential rupture risks these airbags posed.

Judgment and its Underpinnings

The court's comprehensive judgment led to these conclusions:

Acceptable Quality Guarantee: VW's airbags did not have a demonstrable rupture risk and thus, in the eyes of a rational consumer, were not of unacceptable quality.


Defence under s 271(2)(a): If a product's non-compliance is solely due to a third-party supplier's actions or omissions, manufacturers like VW can seek protection under this defence. This point was especially pertinent, given Takata's role.


Damages under s 272(1): The court affirmed that damages should mirror the product's value at the time of the purchase. However, a broader perspective was suggested, encompassing events post-purchase, such as replacements.

Key Takeaways from the Case

The Australian Consumer Law serves as the bedrock to safeguard consumers and ensure they receive products and services of acceptable quality. The landscape of consumer rights and manufacturer responsibilities is ever-evolving, particularly in an age characterised by intricate supply chains and advanced product designs. The case of Dwyer v Volkswagen provides us with a focused lens to explore these nuances. Here, we delve into the pivotal takeaways from this judgment and how they shape our understanding of consumer law in Australia:

Precision in "Acceptable Quality": One of the case's most significant offerings is an enriched comprehension of "acceptable quality." Premised in a blend of objective evaluation and consumer perspective, this standard demands products meet fundamental criteria, such as defect-free production and inherent safety. The ruling establishes that potential risks if they lack a realistic manifestation timeline, are insufficient to render a product of "unacceptable quality."


Manufacturer's defence strengthened: The case demonstrates that manufacturers can seek solace in legal defences when third parties play a central role in product deficiencies. While manufacturers have inherent responsibilities, when third-party actions are demonstrably the root of product defects, manufacturers can potentially seek exclusion of liability. The relevant test being, "only because of an act, default or omission of any person other than the manufacturer".


Nuances in Damage Assessments: Damages, as portrayed in this case, are not black and white. While rooted in the vehicle's purchase value, the court has signalled flexibility, suggesting that events following the purchase could be pertinent in some damage calculations. Such an approach promotes fairness, ensuring that consumers recover actual losses without veering into overcompensation.


Third-party Implications: The judgment underscores that third-party actions (like those of Takata) can play a determining role in ascertaining product compliance and, by extension, manufacturer liability. This reinforces the idea that while manufacturers must ensure the quality of components they use, they might be legally safeguarded if third-party components falter, provided they were not involved in its design or production.


Consumer Law is Dynamic: The case encapsulates the evolving nature of consumer law. As products become more complex and supply chains more intricate, the legal framework needs to adapt. The judgment offers a glimpse into how courts might navigate such complexities in the future.

How Arida Lawyers can assist in similar matters

Arida Lawyers takes pride in its adeptness and profound understanding of Australian Consumer Law, especially in areas concerning motor vehicle disputes, consumer guarantees, and overarching consumer law issues. Here's how our experienced lawyers, who specialise in this domain and have a track record of delivering favourable outcomes for our clients, can assist:

Comprehensive Consultations: We provide detailed and tailored advice on various aspects of the Australian Consumer Law, ensuring our clients understand their position and rights comprehensively.


Navigating the Legal Landscape: Our lawyers are adept at guiding clients through the intricacies of the Australian Consumer Law. Their expertise ensures that clients are well-informed and well-represented in their pursuits.


Tailored Legal Strategies: Recognising the distinctiveness of each case, we develop bespoke legal approaches tailored to our client's specific needs and circumstances. This individualised focus ensures effective representation and optimal outcomes.


Tribunal and Court Representation: Beyond our advisory role, we provide legal representation in Tribunals and courts of NSW, ensuring that our clients are effectively represented at every stage of the legal process.

At Arida Lawyers, our commitment extends beyond mere legal counsel; we are dedicated to upholding and protecting consumer and business rights. Should you identify with the nuances of Dwyer v Volkswagen or find yourself in a similar situation, don't hesitate to contact us. Our mission is to ensure that you manoeuvre the complexities of the Australian Consumer Law with precision and assurance.

This article provides general information relevant to our expert services. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact us for a free initial consultation.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

bottom of page