However, the development risks defe

However, the development risks defence dose compare favourably with its counterpart in negligence, the ‘state of the art’ defence ordered around in Roe v Minister of Health (1954). Whereas Roe seems to set a minimal standard, in that the defendant’s practices must be no worse than what another person in the same field would do, but need not be as good as the best, the development risks defence, as explained by the ECJ, imposes a much higher standard, requiring producers to be aware of the latest knowledge, provided it is accessible.

อย่างไรก็ตามการพัฒนาความเสี่ยงป้องกันที่อยู่ในเกณฑ์ดีเมื่อเปรียบเทียบกับคู่ในความประมาท the ‘state of the art’ defence ordered around in Roe v Minister of Health (1954). ในขณะที่ Roe ดูเหมือนว่าจะกำหนดมาตรฐานที่น้อยที่สุดในการที่การปฏิบัติของจำเ​​ลยต้องไม่เลวร้ายยิ่งกว่าสิ่งที่คนในสาขาเดียวกันอีกจะทำ แต่ไม่จำเป็นต้องเป็นที่ดีเป็นสิ่งที่ดีที่สุดในการพัฒนาความเสี่ยงการป้องกันตามที่อธิบายไว้โดย ECJ, กำหนดมาตรฐานที่สูงมากต้องผลิตที่จะตระหนักถึงความรู้ล่าสุดให้มันสามารถเข้าถึงได้

Results (English) 2:

However, the development risks defence dose compare favourably with its counterpart in negligence, the 'state of the art' defence ordered around in Roe v Minister of Health (1954). Whereas Roe seems to set a minimal standard, in that the defendant's practices must. be no worse than what another person in the same field would do, but need not be as good as the best, the development risks defence, as explained by the ECJ, imposes a much higher standard, requiring producers to be aware of the latest knowledge. , provided it is accessible. However, the development risks defense is in good shape compared with the negligence, the 'state of the art' defence ordered around in Roe v Minister of Health (1954). While Roe seems. to define the minimum standards for the conduct of the defendants must be no worse than what people in the field to do the same. But not necessarily as good as the best in the development risks defense, as explained by the ECJ, set very high standards require manufacturers to be aware of the latest knowledge, make it accessible.

Results (English) 3:

However the development, risks defence dose compare favourably with its counterpart, in negligence the 'state of the art.' Defence ordered around in Roe V Minister of Health (1954). Whereas Roe seems to set a minimal standard in that, the defendant s. ' Practices must be no worse than what another person in the same field would do but need, not be as good as, the bestThe development, risks defence as explained by the ECJ imposes a, much higher standard requiring producers, to be aware. Of the latest knowledge provided it, is accessible.

.However, the development of the risk prevention favorably compared to a pair of careless the 'state of the art defence.' Ordered around in Roe V Minister of Health (1954).While Roe seems to set the standards at least in that the practice of remember the assistants must not worse than what people in the same field will do.ECJ.Set high standards to produce to be aware of the latest knowledge to make it accessible.