Featured Stories
Ropes & Gray Honored With Deal of the Year Recognition at 2026 Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 2 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Honored with Deal of the Year Recognition at 2026 Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards
October 1, 2026
Ropes & Gray's representation of the co-founders and CEO of Guess? in the $1.4 billion take-private of Guess?, Inc. by Authentic Brands Group LLC has been recognized as Deal of the Year ($1 Billion+) at the 2026 Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards.
The all-cash transaction, which valued Guess? at approximately $1.4 billion, represented the largest apparel licensing deal in history
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 2 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Honored with Deal of the Year Recognition at 2026 Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards
October 1, 2026
Ropes & Gray's representation of the co-founders and CEO of Guess? in the $1.4 billion take-private of Guess?, Inc. by Authentic Brands Group LLC has been recognized as Deal of the Year ($1 Billion+) at the 2026 Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards.
The all-cash transaction, which valued Guess? at approximately $1.4 billion, represented the largest apparel licensing deal in historyand the second-largest apparel transaction in 2025.
The Ropes & Gray team was led by IP transactions partner Erica Han and M&A partners Tara Fisher and Christopher Comeau.
The Los Angeles Business Journal M&A Awards, presented in partnership with ACG Los Angeles, honor the transactions and professionals shaping Southern California's dealmaking landscape.
The program celebrates the Deals of the Year, recognizing standout mergers and acquisitions that demonstrated strategic vision and market impact, as well as the Dealmakers of the Year across the advisory community. This recognition underscores the strength and depth of Ropes & Gray's M&A practice and its commitment to delivering exceptional results for clients across complex, high-profile transactions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/rankings-and-awards/2026/10/ropes-gray-honored-with-deal-of-the-year-recognition-los-angeles-business-journal
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Ropes & Gray Advised Initial Purchasers and Lenders in Connection With AIR Limited's $425 Million Bond and $75 Million RCF
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 2 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Advised Initial Purchasers and Lenders in Connection with AIR Limited's $425 Million Bond and $75 Million RCF
October 1, 2026
Ropes & Gray advised the initial purchasers, in connection with the offering by AIR Limited, a direct wholly owned subsidiary of AIR Global PLC (Nasdaq: AIIR), of $425,000,000 aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes due 2031 (the "Notes"). The Notes are guaranteed on a senior basis by AIR Global PLC and certain of the Issuer's subsidiaries.
Ropes &
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 2 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Advised Initial Purchasers and Lenders in Connection with AIR Limited's $425 Million Bond and $75 Million RCF
October 1, 2026
Ropes & Gray advised the initial purchasers, in connection with the offering by AIR Limited, a direct wholly owned subsidiary of AIR Global PLC (Nasdaq: AIIR), of $425,000,000 aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes due 2031 (the "Notes"). The Notes are guaranteed on a senior basis by AIR Global PLC and certain of the Issuer's subsidiaries.
Ropes &Gray also advised the lenders in connection with AIR Limited's $75,000,000 revolving credit facility.
Founded in 1999 and headquartered in Dubai, AIR Global PLC is a global consumer brands and innovation company with a presence in more than 90 markets worldwide.
Its portfolio spans social inhalation and modern nicotine categories through brands including Al Fakher, Crown Switch, Crown Gems, and Al Fakher nicotine pouches.
The Ropes & Gray team was led by Michael Kazakevich and Alex Robb, with support from Ana Biloglav, Amy Olson, Dimos Papanikolaou, Cameron Storah, Kahill Sarronwala, Alexandra Elphick, Lois Elshof and Yinn Wong. Andrew Howard and Matt Parsons provided tax advice.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/news/2026/10/ropes-gray-advised-initial-purchasers-and-lenders-in-connection-with-air-limiteds-bond-and-rcf
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Morgan Lewis Announces New Global Leadership Team as David McManus Begins Chair Term
PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, Oct. 2 -- Morgan Lewis, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
Morgan Lewis Announces New Global Leadership Team as David McManus Begins Chair Term
October 1, 2026: Morgan Lewis today announced its new global leadership team as David McManus commences his five-year term as Firm Chair.
A Morgan Lewis partner for more than 30 years and a longtime leader at both the firm and practice levels, Mr. McManus is organizing the firm's new leadership team around a focus on the firm's elite practices and unified culture. His vision for the future of the firm centers
... Show Full Article
PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, Oct. 2 -- Morgan Lewis, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
Morgan Lewis Announces New Global Leadership Team as David McManus Begins Chair Term
October 1, 2026: Morgan Lewis today announced its new global leadership team as David McManus commences his five-year term as Firm Chair.
A Morgan Lewis partner for more than 30 years and a longtime leader at both the firm and practice levels, Mr. McManus is organizing the firm's new leadership team around a focus on the firm's elite practices and unified culture. His vision for the future of the firm centerson four foundational pillars: seamless client service; relentless practice development; unparalleled professional culture; and disciplined innovation. Supporting these priorities is a leadership team with distinct responsibilities across global strategy, talent, performance, and operations.
The global leadership team includes:
* Christina Melendi, Managing Partner of Global Strategy. Christina will guide the development and execution of the firm's global practice and growth strategy, working closely with practice and industry leadership. A New York partner in the firm's corporate and business transactions practice, Christina has led that practice for the past two years and serves on the firm's Advisory Board.
* Bart W.S. Bassett, Managing Partner of Global Talent. Bart will lead the firm's global talent strategy, working with practice leadership and the firm's professional teams to support the development, advancement, and success of lawyers across Morgan Lewis. A Silicon Valley partner in the firm's tax practice, Bart has led the global tax practice for 14 years and serves on the firm's Advisory Board.
* Steven A. Reed, Managing Partner of Global Performance. Steve will focus on aligning practice and partner performance to execute on the firm's global strategic priorities. A Philadelphia partner in the firm's antitrust and competition practice, Steve has led that practice for more than 12 years and serves on the firm's Advisory Board.
* Tony Licata, Chief Operating Officer. Appointed chief operating officer in 2014, Tony will continue to lead the firm's global professional teams and oversee its business operations. Tony has more than two decades of management and business leadership experience across the legal and professional services sectors, including financial management, business operations, and strategic planning.
"Christina, Bart, Steve, and Tony are accomplished leaders who bring deep institutional knowledge, sound judgment, and distinct perspectives to their roles," said Mr. McManus. "This structure creates clear accountability across key areas of the firm and gives us greater capacity to execute with focus and agility."
Mr. McManus assumes leadership at a time when businesses are confronting legal challenges that intersect with broader questions of growth, risk, regulation, workforce management, technology, and geopolitical uncertainty. Those converging issues increasingly demand advice that crosses traditional practice and geographic boundaries and accounts for their broader business implications.
"Clients do not experience their most important challenges through the lens of a single practice or jurisdiction, and neither can we," Mr. McManus said. "The breadth and depth of our elite platform uniquely positions us to service our clients globally across legal disciplines. Our responsibility is to bring the right people together with speed, coordination, and accountability, while maintaining the deep relationships and collaborative culture that define Morgan Lewis."
* * *
Original text here: https://www.morganlewis.com/news/2026/10/morgan-lewis-announces-new-global-leadership-team-as-david-mcmanus-begins-chair-term
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
K&L Gates Advises on Acquisition and Financing of Mantova Sud Logistics Development Site
PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania, Oct. 2 -- K&L Gates, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
K&L Gates Advises on Acquisition and Financing of Mantova Sud Logistics Development Site
1 October 2026
Global law firm K&L Gates advised Savills IM SGR, as manager of an Italian real estate fund, and Barings Real Estate European Value Add Fund III, as a unitholder of the fund, on the mortgage financing aspects of the acquisition of an approximately 145,000 square meters development site in Mantova Sud, Italy, for the construction of a Class A logistics warehouse development.
The site has planning
... Show Full Article
PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania, Oct. 2 -- K&L Gates, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
K&L Gates Advises on Acquisition and Financing of Mantova Sud Logistics Development Site
1 October 2026
Global law firm K&L Gates advised Savills IM SGR, as manager of an Italian real estate fund, and Barings Real Estate European Value Add Fund III, as a unitholder of the fund, on the mortgage financing aspects of the acquisition of an approximately 145,000 square meters development site in Mantova Sud, Italy, for the construction of a Class A logistics warehouse development.
The site has planningconsent for the development of approximately 67,000 square meters of Grade A logistics space in the Verona logistics submarket. Construction commenced in August 2026 and completion is scheduled for the third quarter of 2027. Upon completion, the development is expected to target a minimum LEED Gold certification.
Barings acquired the asset on behalf of a European value-add real estate strategy. The property is owned through an Italian real estate fund managed by Savills IM SGR and is situated in Mantova Sud, approximately 50 kilometers south of Verona. The development is located near the A22 motorway, a key European logistics corridor connecting northern Italy with Austria and Germany. The transaction represents Barings' fourth logistics development in the Mantova micro-market.
The K&L Gates team was led by Milan partner Chiara Anceschi. The team also included London partner Richard Hardwick on English law matters, Milan partner Vittorio Salvadori di Wiesenhoff on tax matters, Milan counsel Giorgio Paludetti, Milan associates Viola Mereu and Elisa Massimetti, and Luxembourg partner Jan Boeing and senior associate Maria Savvidou on Luxembourg law matters.
"We were pleased to help Barings and Savills IM SGR move this development forward. Its location along a major European logistics corridor and the planned sustainability features make it a compelling addition to the Northern Italy market," said Anceschi.
* * *
K&L Gates is a globally integrated law firm trusted by sophisticated clients to deliver market leading legal counsel across jurisdictions and industries. Operating as one firm worldwide, K&L Gates combines deep local insight with seamless global coordination to address clients' most complex legal and business challenges. Guided by a relentless focus on client service, the firm delivers practical, high impact solutions with consistency, efficiency, and a clear emphasis on results.
* * *
URL: Savills IM SGR
* * *
Original text here: https://www.klgates.com/KL-Gates-Advises-on-Acquisition-and-Financing-of-Mantova-Sud-Logistics-Development-Site-10-1-2026
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Fisher Phillips Issues Insight: California's New Agricultural Minimum Wage Will Near $20 Per Hour in 2027 - Key Takeaways for Ag Employers
ATLANTA, Georgia, Oct. 2 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following Insight:
* * *
California's New Agricultural Minimum Wage Will Near $20 Per Hour in 2027: Key Takeaways for Ag Employers
Oct 1, 2026
A new California law will significantly increase the state minimum wage for "approved" agricultural workers starting in 2027. This change will directly impact employers who utilize the H-2A guestworker program and apply not only to H-2A employees, but also to any other agricultural worker working for the H-2A employer in the same county. Read on for all the details ag employers need
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, Oct. 2 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following Insight:
* * *
California's New Agricultural Minimum Wage Will Near $20 Per Hour in 2027: Key Takeaways for Ag Employers
Oct 1, 2026
A new California law will significantly increase the state minimum wage for "approved" agricultural workers starting in 2027. This change will directly impact employers who utilize the H-2A guestworker program and apply not only to H-2A employees, but also to any other agricultural worker working for the H-2A employer in the same county. Read on for all the details ag employers needto know, plus four actions you should consider taking now.
Overview
Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill (AB 2646) yesterday that will raise California's minimum hourly wage for certain agricultural workers (see "Who's Covered?" below), effective January 1, 2027. Specifically, the new industry-specific rate will be $19.75 per hour, subject to annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) starting in 2028.
The wage hike will be a major jump for the ag industry compared to the current statewide minimum, which is $16.90 per hour for 2026 (rising to $17.40 in 2027), and the federal minimum wage, which remains at $7.25 per hour. According to a Senate Floor Analysis, AB 2646 is:
* supported by the state's Department of Justice and several unions, including the United Farm Workers, which said that the increase "safeguards vulnerable California farm workers against deepening wage depression in the middle of escalating prices for food and basic necessities."
* strongly opposed by a long list of trade associations (including CalChamber, Western Growers Association, California Farm Labor Contractor Association, California Citrus Mutual, California Association of Winegrape Growers, Grower-Shipper Association of Central California, California Farm Bureau, and other agricultural coalitions), which said that the new wage floor "would impose significant new costs on California farms that already operate on extremely thin margins," and that "policies that make it more difficult or costly to use [the H-2A] program risk accelerating the loss of agricultural production in California."
AB 2646 is part of a larger trend in California where industry-specific minimum wages have already been enacted for the fast-food industry and certain healthcare employees.
Who's Covered?
Agricultural employers in California will be required to pay the increased minimum wage to "approved agricultural employees" and "corresponding employees." Here's how those terms are currently defined in the law:
* An "approved agricultural employee" means an employee who is engaged in agriculture, is a resident outside of California, and has a permit to work in the state on a temporary or seasonal basis (a position lasting no longer than one year, except in extraordinary circumstances) as a result of an application or job order to hire ag workers on such basis that has been approved, in part or in whole, by the Labor and Workforce Development Agency or the Employment Development Department.
Does this essentially mean H-2A employees? Realistically, individuals hired through the H-2A visa program will be the only employees who qualify as "approved agricultural employees." AB 2646 is likely California's response to the US DOL's interim final rule that dramatically reshaped the H-2A program's minimum wage policy and reduced H-2A wage rates in the Golden State - though those rates are up in the air again following a federal court order on August 26.
* A "corresponding employee" means an employee who is engaged in agriculture, is a resident of California, and performs the same (or substantially similar) work during the same period, as an approved agricultural employee employed by the same employer in the same county. Note: This is different than the federal H-2A definition of "corresponding employment," which generally means local workers doing work included on an approved job order. Under the California definition, any agricultural employee working in the same county as an H-2A employee employed by the same employer is entitled to the higher wage, even if they are not doing the type of work listed in the employer's H-2A Job Order.
Under the new state law, an employee is engaged in "agriculture" if they perform work covered by the state's Agricultural Labor Relations Act.
Any Exceptions?
Since AB 2646 would be added to the state's minimum wage laws, it appears that employees who are exempt under the existing rules (such as individuals who are the parent, spouse, or child of the employer) would continue to be exempt under any new agriculture-specific minimum rate.
4 Steps for Agricultural Employers to Take Now
1. Consult with counsel to determine if the minimum wage requirements apply to your business and which workers are covered.
2. Revise applicable policies to ensure compliance with the new minimum wage requirements and review your wage and hour practices. With a higher minimum wage comes higher meal and rest period premiums, higher reporting time pay, higher split shift premiums, and higher waiting time penalties.
3. Notify covered employees of the minimum wage schedule that applies to them and publish any required posters or notices.
4. Stay tuned for updates, including the 2027 COLA increase amount and any potential legal challenges to AB 2646.
* * *
Related People
Rebecca Hause-Schultz
Partner
rhause-schultz@fisherphillips.com
916/210-0391
* * *
Alden J. Parker
Regional Managing Partner
aparker@fisherphillips.com
916/21-0404
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/insights/insights/californias-new-agricultural-minimum-wage
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Fisher Phillips Issues Insight: California Raises Pay Data Reporting Penalties Fivefold - 5 Things You Should Do
ATLANTA, Georgia, Oct. 2 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following Insight:
* * *
California Raises Pay Data Reporting Penalties Fivefold: 5 Things You Should Do
Oct 1, 2026
California employers that fail to file their required pay data report with the state will soon face increased fines, seeing certain penalties jump from $200 to $1,000 per employee. Thanks to SB 1237, signed by the Governor late yesterday, the court-imposed maximum civil penalty for subsequent failures to file an annual pay data report with the Civil Rights Department (CRD) will see the fivefold increase. The
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, Oct. 2 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following Insight:
* * *
California Raises Pay Data Reporting Penalties Fivefold: 5 Things You Should Do
Oct 1, 2026
California employers that fail to file their required pay data report with the state will soon face increased fines, seeing certain penalties jump from $200 to $1,000 per employee. Thanks to SB 1237, signed by the Governor late yesterday, the court-imposed maximum civil penalty for subsequent failures to file an annual pay data report with the Civil Rights Department (CRD) will see the fivefold increase. Thegood news is that the new law will leave the first violation cap at $100 per employee, only ratcheting up the maximum fines for succeeding violations. What are the five things you should do to prepare for your next filing period?
Who Does the Pay Data Report Requirement Apply To?
California employers with 100 or more employees, or 100 or more labor contractors and at least one employee or labor contractor in the state or connected to the state, are subject to the law.
How Quickly Can Penalties Add Up?
Very. For an employer with 1,000 reportable employees, a second missed filing could now support a penalty of up to $1 million rather than $200,000. Because penalties are assessed per employee, exposure is based on headcount, so the largest filers will absorb the largest increase.
When is the Next Report Due?
The reports are due on the second Wednesday of May each year. The next deadline falls on May 12, 2027, which is the first cycle in which a heightened SB 1237 penalty could apply.
Which Report Types Are Covered?
The increase is not limited to the main pay data report that must be submitted by employers with 100 or more employees. The statute separately requires those private employers with 100 or more employees hired through labor contractors to file a distinct report covering those workers, and to disclose the ownership names of all labor contractors used. A repeat failure on the labor contractor employee report carries the same $1,000 per-employee exposure as a repeat failure on the employee report.
What Hasn't Changed?
The bill leaves the apportionment provision untouched. If an employer cannot submit a complete and accurate report because a labor contractor failed to provide the required pay data, the court may apportion an appropriate share of the penalties to that labor contractor. The employer carries the primary obligation and the risk that a court declines to shift any share. And because the underlying penalty on a repeat violation is now up to five times larger, the practical value of a documented record of data requests and contractor non-response rises with it.
Does the Court Have Any Discretion?
No, thanks to a change that already took effect this year. SB 464, passed in 2025 and taking effect for the 2026 reporting year, replaced the prior discretionary standard (where a court "may" impose penalties) with a mandatory one (where a court "shall" impose" on CRD's request). Under the current framework, if CRD petitions the court over a nonfiling, the penalty follows, and administrative explanations such as technical problems, internal miscommunication, or a misread deadline do not reduce it.
What Should Employers Do Now?
Here is your five-step plan to prepare for the May 2027 report period.
1. Confirm coverage before the next cycle. Reassess employee and labor contractor counts, integrated enterprise questions among affiliated entities, and whether any entity crossed the 100-employee threshold during the reporting year.
2. Lock in data collection from labor contractors contractually. Build reporting obligations, data formats, and delivery deadlines into vendor agreements so you are not dependent on voluntary cooperation weeks before the deadline.
3. Assign single-point ownership of the filing, with a backup. Most non-filings trace to turnover or an unassigned task rather than a decision not to comply.
4. Cure past non-filing. Because the penalty tier turns on whether a failure is a first or subsequent one, you have a strong reason to resolve prior gaps and document the correction before the next deadline.
5. Retain proof of submission. Save confirmation records, portal receipts, and correspondence with CRD, since these are the practical defense to a claim that no report was filed.
* * *
Related People
Sheila M. Abron
Partner
sabron@fisherphillips.com
803/740-7676
* * *
Jacklin Rad
Partner
jrad@fisherphillips.com
213/403-9606
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/insights/insights/california-raises-pay-data-reporting-penalties-fivefold
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Faegre Drinker Issues Insight: Dissecting the EU's New Product Liability Directive - Dawn of US-Style Discovery?
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, Oct. 2 -- Faegre Drinker Biddle and Reath, a law firm, issued the following insight:
* * *
October 01, 2026
Dissecting the EU's New Product Liability Directive: The Dawn of US-Style Discovery?
Update on new disclosure obligations in the EU for product liability cases and strategies for complying with the new rules
At a Glance
* The implementation deadline for the EU's new Product Liability Directive is fast-approaching -- December 9. Among other things, the new PLD imposes more stringent disclosure requirements of company documents than had typically been permitted
... Show Full Article
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, Oct. 2 -- Faegre Drinker Biddle and Reath, a law firm, issued the following insight:
* * *
October 01, 2026
Dissecting the EU's New Product Liability Directive: The Dawn of US-Style Discovery?
Update on new disclosure obligations in the EU for product liability cases and strategies for complying with the new rules
At a Glance
* The implementation deadline for the EU's new Product Liability Directive is fast-approaching -- December 9. Among other things, the new PLD imposes more stringent disclosure requirements of company documents than had typically been permittedunder current laws in most EU member states.
* While full implementation has been limited to date, it is likely that additional EU members will pass new or updated legislation at the national level in the coming months, which may include new disclosure requirements and discovery obligations.
* Companies -- especially those in technical fields -- should prepare protocols to ensure company evidence is kept, organized, and can be presented in the accessible format, so that disclosure requirements can be met in an orderly and efficient manner if claims arise. Companies should also keep in mind that there are differences amongst jurisdictions that may impact obligations and best practices for compliance.
-
In April 2025, we published "Ten Things to Know about the European Union's New Product Liability Directive," outlining the numerous changes introduced by the EU's new Product Liability Directive (EU) 2024/2853 (the PLD), which makes sweeping changes to product liability laws in the EU.1 This article takes a closer look at Article 9 of the PLD, which deserves further attention for its effect on evidence disclosure in product liability lawsuits. While Article 9 does not import US-style discovery into Europe, American lawyers will find similarities in Article 9 with staples of discovery in US federal courts, such as initial disclosure obligations and the proportionality standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26.
Evidence Disclosure under Article 9 of the Product Liability Directive
For many EU jurisdictions where discovery of company documents is typically limited or effectively nonexistent in current practice, Article 9 gives plaintiffs a new tool to obtain evidence from manufacturers. And the new obligations are armed with teeth -- noncompliance with a disclosure order can result in a presumption of defectiveness under Article 10.
Because the PLD is a directive rather than a regulation, it does not automatically become law in each EU member state. Instead, it sets forth threshold requirements that each member must transpose into its own national law by the December 9, 2026, deadline. As a result, while the PLD applies across the EU, the mechanics of disclosure in a given case will be shaped by the implementing legislation of the EU member state where the claim is brought and subject to differences in scope and procedure at that national level. We have most recently written about the current state of implementation in "Transposing the EU's New Product Liability Directive: A Member State Progress Report -- September 2026 Updates."
Under Article 9, defendants in a product liability action are "required to disclose relevant evidence that is at the defendant's disposal" if the claimant "has presented facts and evidence sufficient to support the plausibility of the claim." That said, there are some important limits on this disclosure obligation. Disclosure is confined to what is "necessary and proportionate" under the implementing law of the member state in question, and courts must weigh the request for disclosure against the legitimate interests of all parties, including protective measures to limit disclosure of evidence containing confidential information and trade secrets. When evidence is disclosed, courts may also require defendants to present it in an "easily accessible and easily understandable manner," as long as the presentation is proportionate in terms of cost and effort for the producing party.
For companies accustomed to litigating under broad pretrial discovery available in US courts, these requirements likely seem modest, but compared to many current EU civil law systems, the PLD represents a significant expansion of what a plaintiff can compel a defendant to disclose. And because complying with discovery costs time and money, it potentially increases the burden for companies doing business in the EU.
The stakes for getting disclosure right under the PLD's new rules are high because, under Article 10, failure to comply with a disclosure order can trigger a presumption of defectiveness and substantively affect the merits of the case. Disclosure compliance should therefore be a heightened priority for any company that may be involved in such litigation.
If a plaintiff can make a plausible allegation that a device malfunctioned, the plaintiff could seek a variety of documents from the manufacturer to test whether the manufacturer knew of the alleged defect or adequately responded to product safety concerns. While the manufacturer can argue to limit the scope and format of these disclosures, the touchstone will still be whether the request is "necessary and proportionate," along with any confidentiality and trade secret protections and other safeguards that may be recognized in the member state concerned.
Uneven Implementation by EU Member States
Implementation at the national level continues to proceed unevenly, and companies should expect the pace and detail of transposition to vary. While many countries have reported draft transposition bills, very few have completed PLD transposition into national legislation. There are already signs of material and significant divergence in how Article 9 standards will be transposed and applied from one member state to the next within the umbrella of discretion permitted under the PLD. For example, Denmark's draft law expressly permits courts to order the production of newly created documents meant to compile or organize existing information, while Finland's draft law limits production to presenting already existing documents. In a different vein, Germany's draft law excludes application of these new rules altogether to certain medicinal products regulated under a separate liability regime established in that country.
Given these diverging interpretations of the PLD's disclosure provisions, companies will have to stay vigilant about disclosure obligations -- and their differences -- across the EU and cannot assume a one-size-fits-all approach will be adequate.
Strategies to Prepare
Given this uncertainty, companies operating within the EU would benefit from preparation rather than waiting for a claim to arise:
* Practically, this entails tracking where key evidence lives within the organization -- regardless of where it was created -- and confirming it can be retrieved if needed.
* Similar to litigation hold practices for litigation in the US, companies should also establish protocols that can be deployed when a claim becomes plausible, so that relevant evidence is preserved before a disclosure request arrives.
* Additionally, since disclosure requests can cross borders, companies should review the relevant laws of each jurisdiction in which they operate to understand what information will be protected.
* Finally, companies -- especially those in technical fields -- should prepare protocols to ensure company evidence is kept, organized, and can be presented in the accessible format required under Article 9.
While much uncertainty remains about this still-developing disclosure regime, these strategies can materially improve a company's position when a dispute arises under the new rules that the PLD requires to be in place by the end of 2026.
* * *
1. The full text of the Directive is available for download at the following EU website: Directive - 2024/2853 - EN - Product Liability Directive - EUR-Lex.
* * *
The material contained in this communication is informational, general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. The material contained in this communication should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances. This communication was published on the date specified and may not include any changes in the topics, laws, rules or regulations covered. Receipt of this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. In some jurisdictions, this communication may be considered attorney advertising.
* * *
Meet the Authors
Eldin Hasic
Partner
Fort Wayne
260/460-1704
eldin.hasic@faegredrinker.com
* * *
Patrick H. Reilly
Partner
Indianapolis
317/237-1087
patrick.reilly@faegredrinker.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.faegredrinker.com/en/insights/publications/2026/10/dissecting-the-eu-new-product-liability-directive-the-dawn-of-us-style-discovery
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
