The European Union has adopted Directive (EU) 2024/2853 (the PLD), a comprehensive update to its product liability regime that Member States must transpose into national law by December 9, 2026. Some Member States have already begun with the transposition, and one–Hungary–has completed it. This reform modernizes the EU’s strict liability framework and will directly shape risk and litigation exposure for aviation and aerospace stakeholders across the value chain. In particular, the PLD expands what counts as a “product,” broadens who can be sued, lowers claimants’ evidentiary hurdles, and introduces new procedural and compliance expectations that will materially affect how product cases are litigated in the EU. Companies operating in civil aviation, business and general aviation, and advanced air mobility–including developers of autonomous aircraft and eVTOL platforms–should move now to align governance, contracting, and technical controls within this new landscape.
Expanded scope: software, digital functionality, and AI are now explicitly in scope
The aviation and aerospace industry is largely subject to the scope of the new PLD: the technology that enables aircraft to read and interpret key flight data in real time–and to adjust, climb, turn, and land accordingly–is highly sophisticated. In parallel, software is integral not only to flight operations but also to maintenance and other essential functions throughout the aircraft lifecycle. In that regard, the PLD expressly brings software-embedded, stand-alone, and cloud-hosted-within the definition of a “product,” capturing firmware, operating systems, AI systems, and digital manufacturing files. For aviation, this includes avionics and flight-control software, maintenance and condition-monitoring tools, and other connected capabilities, as well as post-delivery changes such as software updates and over-the-air upgrades. The Directive also reaches related digital services that are integrated into or interconnected with a product in such a way that their absence would prevent the product from performing one of its functions–bringing, for example, navigation, monitoring, and voice-assisted services into scope when they are integral to aircraft operation or support.
These highly technical features of modern flight and the centrality of software in aviation make it difficult to avoid the conclusion that the PLD will expose manufacturers, developers, distributors, and others in the supply chain to increased liability, especially as EU regulation may encourage more U.S.-style litigation dynamics.
Who can be sued: a cascading EU-facing defendant hierarchy
Where products are manufactured outside the EU, the PLD institutes a cascading liability hierarchy to ensure that an EU-based defendant is available. If the manufacturer is not established in the EU, liability moves first to the importer, then to the authorized representative, and if neither exists, to the fulfillment service provider. This approach reflects the realities of contemporary supply chains and the growing role of logistics providers in cross-border commerce. Coupled with the EU’s movement toward U.S.-style class actions and collective redress mechanisms, the aviation industry may face increased exposure to group action-style litigation, particularly in high-profile incidents involving passenger aircraft or connected aviation technologies.
Easing the claimant’s path: presumptions and burden-shifting
The PLD introduces rebuttable presumptions that significantly lower the burden of proof for claimants. Defectiveness is presumed if a manufacturer fails to disclose relevant evidence, if the product does not comply with mandatory safety requirements, or if there is an “obvious malfunction.” Causation is presumed if a defect is established and the damage is of a kind typically consistent with that defect. In addition, where claimants face “excessive difficulties” due to technical or scientific complexity–conditions likely present in aviation matters involving aircraft systems and aerospace technologies–courts may presume defectiveness and/or causation.
Recoverable loss: broadened categories of compensable damages
The PLD expands compensable damages to include death or personal injury, including medically recognized psychological harm. It also covers property damage, excluding the defective product itself and property used exclusively for professional purposes. Further, destruction or corruption of nonprofessional data is expressly recoverable, which may be relevant in incidents where consumer data associated with software-enabled functions is lost or compromised.
Evidence and disclosure: toward more robust, U.S.-style discovery
The PLD authorizes national courts to order necessary and proportionate disclosure of relevant evidence from both claimants and defendants, and to require that technical materials be presented in a clear, accessible format. This marks a significant shift in the EU, where most Member States have limited (if any) discovery. As a result, sensitive materials, including internal documents and legal advice, are at a greater risk of being disclosed in litigation. The risk is heightened in jurisdictions where privilege does not extend to in-house lawyers or to communications solely with external U.S. counsel. To mitigate risk, companies should route attorney–client communications through external EU counsel.
Collective redress and litigation funding
The PLD coexists with the EU’s Representative Actions Directive, which enables qualified entities (such as consumer organizations) to bring actions on behalf of affected individuals, increasing the likelihood and scale of aviation-related product litigation. The growing presence of litigation funders in the EU further heightens these risks.
Defenses and long-stop periods
Member States have discretion to omit the “state-of-the-art” defense (i.e., that a defect could not have been discovered given the scientific and technical knowledge at the time), potentially exposing companies even where a defect could not have been discovered given the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the relevant time. The standard long-stop period is 10 years, extended to 25 years for latent injuries, expanding the window in which claims may be brought.
Practical steps for aviation and aerospace companies
- Map the portfolio: Companies may wish to identify aircraft, components, software, and digital services that fall within the expanded product definition and assess exposure across the end-to-end supply chain.
- Fortify cybersecurity and update protocols: It may be prudent to implement robust security controls, ensure timely software updates, and maintain evidence of conformity with evolving EU standards (including the Cyber Resilience Act and NIS2 Directive).
- Strengthen technical and legal recordkeeping: Companies should consider maintaining comprehensive records of safety analyses, software revision histories, and incident-response actions to support defensibility in disputes.
- Review and update contracts: It may be advisable to update supplier, developer, and distribution agreements to address the PLD’s broadened liability framework, including indemnities, insurance coverage, and obligations for post-market changes.
- Prepare for disclosure: Organizations may benefit from building document-retention and evidence-management systems designed for proportionate but effective disclosure, while protecting trade secrets and privileged communications to the extent possible.
- Manage privilege and forum risk: Companies should consider calibrating privilege and confidentiality strategies to European norms and reduce forum-shopping exposure through coordinated cross-border litigation planning.
- Monitor implementation and case law: It will be important to track Member State transposition and emerging jurisprudence, with particular attention to the scope of presumptions and treatment of the state-of-the-art defense.
- Engage externally: Companies may wish to participate in industry and policy fora to shape implementation around proportional disclosure, presumption standards, adoption of state-of-the-art defense, and the regulation of litigation funding.
Conclusion
The PLD represents a step-change for aviation and aerospace companies, especially those advancing autonomous, connected, and software-driven technologies, requiring elevated risk controls, disciplined software-update and cybersecurity practices, and careful curation of supply-chain responsibilities. As Member States advance national transposition, close monitoring in key jurisdictions and a coordinated, enterprise-wide strategy will be critical to positioning for compliance and litigation resilience under the new legal framework.
To support companies in tracking Member State implementation efforts, we have developed an interactive EU Product Liability Tracker. This resource allows users to view implementation status by country, access links to draft legislation where available, review comment periods and deadlines, and read summaries of proposed national measures. We encourage companies to use this tool as they monitor developments and plan their compliance strategies.
Client Alert 2026-034