Litigation strategy is an art, a game of details that can completely change the outcome of a case that, at first glance, seemed lost. When you receive a file where 94 out of 95 industrial components have failed, the initial reaction is to blame the component supplier. But appearances can be deceiving, and the answer is not always clear. The distribution of responsibilities in these cases is a meticulous task, a methodical search where every small gesture can reveal a hidden truth.
Culpa in eligendo: the weight of the choice
The concept of culpa in eligendo refers to the responsibility that falls on the person who chooses a third party to carry out a task. In the context of industrial business litigation, this principle is applied by analogy and becomes crucial when a client selects a supplier to provide components that, by themselves, have no utility, as they are meant to be incorporated into a machine to perform a function. Think of a screw: on its own, it has no functionality, it doesn't connect anything. It only serves its purpose when incorporated into a larger and more complex component or machine.
In many cases, when a component shows defects, the immediate assumption is a manufacturing defect. But what happens when the reality is more complex? When the engineers who designed the machine do not properly foresee the conditions of use, fail to specify the right material, or do not calibrate the technical requirements, who should be held accountable? The technical details become the pieces of a puzzle that must be precisely fitted together.
Investigation in detail: an illustrative case
Let’s imagine a company that acquires bearings for a machine that is meant to operate outdoors. If the client’s engineers do not specify that the material must be stainless and the supplier provides a standard product, the premature wear is not the supplier’s fault, but rather the result of the client’s poor selection. The mistake in choice is often hidden behind vague specifications and hasty decisions, but a thorough analysis always uncovers the truth.
The key role of contract clauses: a double-edged sword
Contracts between companies must clearly define the responsibilities of each party. Suppliers should not assume risks that are not their responsibility for mechanisms they have not designed. Establishing clauses that delimit responsibility based on the information provided by the client is essential to avoid future conflicts. Thus, it is crucial for a supplier not to be held responsible for the usage, loads, and operation of the mechanisms into which their component is incorporated. For the client, it is important that the supplier knows all the details regarding the intended use of the component.
When strategy changes everything: jurisprudence
A recent case in which GRÀCIACALBET intervened, Section 14 of the Provincial Court of Barcelona, in judgment 981/2024 of 02/12/2024, appeal 749/2022, exemplifies the importance of a good strategic approach. Initially, it seemed clear that the supplier had delivered defective components. However, a thorough analysis showed that the product was not defective, and the responsibility lay with the client, who had chosen a product that was unsuitable for the function to which it was assigned.
The case involved bearings to transmit movement, which the client intended for photovoltaic panels, but the engineers chose standard bearings without requiring any level of sealing, without defining a temperature range, or specifying that the materials should be stainless, among other aspects. The result? Most of the bearings were installed outdoors, in areas with extreme temperatures and harsh weather conditions. As a consequence, most suffered blockages when water entered the gears and froze due to low temperatures. Although initial impressions pointed to the supplier’s responsibility, a meticulous defense, a detailed study of every element of the case, and a clear presentation in court led the Tribunal to dismiss the claim, ruling that the responsibility for the component blockages lay with the client, who had wrongly chosen the component for their solar trackers.
The ruling also addressed key aspects of international sales of goods, such as the validity of documents in foreign languages or the application of the 1980 Vienna Convention and its expiration periods, which merited a post on the blog of José Carlos Fernandez Rozas, Professor of Private International Law and Member of the Institut de Droit International.
Conclusions
This case highlights the importance of a well-thought-out strategic approach in litigation, particularly in industrial disputes. The concept of culpa in eligendo—responsibility for choosing a third party—emerges as a key element in determining liability, especially when components or materials are involved. In this instance, the initial assumption of supplier fault was proven to be misplaced, with the responsibility ultimately lying with the client for making an improper choice of components.
The case underscores how crucial it is to clearly define specifications, particularly when selecting components for a specific function. Engineers and clients must take all technical factors into account—such as environmental conditions and material requirements—to ensure the longevity and functionality of the products. Missteps in these areas can lead to significant consequences.
Furthermore, the ruling emphasizes the importance of rigorous analysis and the strategic use of contract clauses, ensuring that responsibility is properly allocated and that both parties are aware of the technical requirements. This case also underscores the role of international trade laws, such as the 1980 Vienna Convention, in resolving commercial disputes effectively.
Ultimately, a meticulous and strategic approach can not only change the outcome of a case but also help prevent similar issues from arising in future contractual relationships.
Each litigation is a battle of reasoning, where precision and strategic vision can transform the outcome of a case. Culpa in eligendo is not just a legal doctrine applied by analogy to industrial disputes, but a reminder that, in the business world, making decisions without the proper knowledge can have serious consequences. As lawyers, our challenge is to uncover the hidden truth in the details, turn complexity into a simple yet compelling narrative, and, in the end, ensure that justice prevails.
Partner and director of the Litigation Department of GRÀCIACALBET.
