United States: CPSIA Changes Demand Proactive Compliance

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) significantly increased the Consumer Product Safety

Commission's (CPSC) power to regulate product hazards that pose a risk of harm to consumers. Among the major changes implemented by the CPSIA are (1) shorter deadlines for responding to the CPSC to prevent the commission from disclosing information publicly, (2) enhanced CPSC enforcement power, and (3) dramatic increases to the upper limits of the civil and criminal penalties that the CPSC can seek. This article focuses on the third category of these changes, discusses how the CPSC has used its newfound powers to penalize offending entities, and offers advice on how companies that are subject to CPSC rules can avoid or lessen their exposure to civil and criminal penalties.

Even before Congress enacted the CPSIA a company was required to report product hazards to the CPSC. But now the potential consequences of failing to do so—or of failing to do so in a timely manner—are much more severe. For example, the CPSIA increased more than tenfold the amount of the civil penalty for each violation that the CPSC can seek for failing to comply with CPSC rules and regulations.

The CPSC has been an extremely active agency since the CPSIA's enactment, and it has had many important goals. Among its initial highest priorities were to better regulate children's products and products manufactured in China. It has concentrated on "fast tracking" recalls designed to streamline and expedite the recall process. The CPSC has also taken a number of steps intended to provide the public with greater access to information regard ing consumer product safety, including launching the publicly available consumer product information database, SaferProducts. gov, improving the commission website, and establishing a presence on social media sites.

Signs indicate that one of the CPSC's current priorities is to send a message to companies that they need to report product hazards in a timely manner by assessing penalties against those companies that belatedly report product hazards. It is now common for the CPSC to initiate post-recall investigations for purposes of evaluating whether imposing penalties for untimely reporting are warranted. For example, on August 3, 2011, the CPSC announced that Black & Decker agreed to pay a $960,000 civil penalty following the recall of about 200,000 weed trimmers and stated, "The settlement resolves CPSC staff's allegations that Black & Decker knowingly failed to report several safety defects and hazards with the Grasshog XP immediately to CPSC, as required by federal law. CPSC staff also alleges the firm withheld information requested by CPSC staff during the course of the investigation." Press Release U.S. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n, Black & Decker Agrees to $960,000 Civil Penalty for Failing to Report Defective Grasshog XP Weed Trimmer/Edgers, No. 11-295 (Aug. 3, 2011), http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prerel.html (follow "Press Release Number" hyperlink; then search for "11295").

The table below contains a list of civil penalties sought by the CPSC from January 1, 2011, through August 4, 2011, compiled from press releases on the CPSC website: This list suggests that the number of and penalty amounts in the future will increase and could also include criminal penalties. The CPSC successfully secured criminal penalties that included prison sentences for the president and contractors of a Tampa firm convicted of falsifying data in connection with child-resistance testing of cigarette lighters. Press Release, U.S. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n, Four Convicted and Sentenced in Youth Research Lighter Testing Fraud Case, No. 11-292 (Aug. 1, 2011), http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prerel.html (follow "Press Release Number" hyperlink; then search for "11292"). The commission chair, Inez Tenenbaum, commenting on the convictions, declared, "Firms are on notice that fraudulent testing of hazardous products such as lighters will not be tolerated by the CPSC." Id.

In many instances, a company, to its distress, learns that an investigation is occurring after the company has been involved in months of seemingly cooperative discussions with the CPSC's Compliance Division staff regarding a voluntary recall. Thus, companies seeking to avoid penalties must evaluate their internal systems for identifying reportable products and promptly report potential problems about those products to the CPSC.

Reporting Requirements Under Section 15(b)

Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) regulations obligate a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer of a consumer product to notify the CPSC immediately if it obtains information that reasonably supports the conclusion that a product (1) fails to comply with any applicable consumer product safety rule, regulation, standard, ban, or any other act enforced by the commission; (2) contains a defect that could create a substantial product hazard; or (3) creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to consumers. See 15 U.S.C. §2064(b). Companies must understand the rules and regulations applicable to their products to identify rule or regulation noncompliance effectively at the time that it arises.

Substantial Product Hazards

Manufacturers do not need to report every defective product to the CPSC. Only a defect that creates a substantial product hazard to consumers implicates a reporting requirement under the CPSC regulations. The CPSA defines "substantial product hazard" as "a product defect which (because of the pattern of defect, the number of defective products distributed in commerce, the severity of the risk, or otherwise) creates a substantial risk of injury to the public." 15 U.S.C. §2064(a)(2). But a defect need not manifest itself through actual product failures or injuries to trigger an obligation to report: "Even one defective product can present a substantial risk of injury and provide a basis for a substantial product hazard determination under section 15 of the CPSA if the injury which might occur is serious and/or if the injury is likely to occur." 16 C.F.R. §115.12(g)(1)(ii).

In deciding whether to report a risk to the CPSC, firms may use the following criteria, which the CPSC staff also considers in determining whether a substantial product hazard exists:

(i) Pattern of defect. The commission and the staff will consider whether the defect arises from the design, composition, contents, construction, finish, packaging, warnings, or instructions of the product or from some other cause and will consider the conditions under which the defect manifests itself.

(ii) Number of defective products distributed in commerce. Even one defective product can present a substantial risk of injury and provide a basis for a substantial product hazard determination under section 15 of the CPSA if the injury that might occur is serious and/or if the injury is likely to occur. However, a few defective products with no potential for causing serious injury and little likelihood of injuring even in a minor way will not ordinarily provide a proper basis for a substantial product hazard determination. The commission also recognizes that the number of products remaining with consumers is a relevant consideration.

(iii) Severity of the risk. A risk is severe if the injury that might occur is serious and/or if the injury is likely to occur. In considering the likelihood of any injury, the commission and the staff will consider the number of injuries reported to have occurred, the intended or reasonably foreseeable use or misuse of the product, and the population group exposed to the product (e.g., children, elderly, handicapped).

(iv) Other considerations. The commission and the staff will consider all other relevant factors.

16 C.F.R. §115.12(g).

If a company determines that a defect could create a substantial product hazard, it must immediately report to the commission because the commission has decided that "[m]ost defects could present a substantial product hazard if the public is exposed to significant numbers of defective products or if the possible injury is serious or is likely to occur." 16 C.F.R. §1115.4. The CPSC urges companies not to wait for injuries to occur before reporting a potential product hazard: "Since the extent of public exposure and/or the likelihood or seriousness of injury are ordinarily not known at the time a defect first manifests itself, subject firms are urged to report if in doubt as to whether a defect could present a substantial product hazard." Id. The CPSC guidance on this issue is consistent and clear: when in doubt report.

The duty to report arises the moment that a company receives information of a potential hazard. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that "[w]here a manufacturer fails to report a potential defect, but it turns out that no actual defect exists, the Commission may decide not to seek a penalty. That does not mean, however, that there was no violation of section 2064(b)." United States v. Mirama Enterprises, 387 F.3d 983, 988 (9th Cir. 2004). As the court further explained, "[i]nformation about a possible defect triggers the duty to report, which in turn allows the Commission either to conclude that no defect exists or to require appropriate corrective action." Id. So a violation can occur and the commission may impose a penalty even if a product ultimately is not determined to be defective.

Unreasonable Risk of Serious Injury or Death

The CPSC requires a report if a reasonable person could conclude, given the information available, that a product under any circumstances creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death. 16 C.F.R. §1115.6(b). According to the commission, "[t]he use of the term 'unreasonable risk' suggests that the risk of injury presented by a product should be evaluated to determine if that risk is a reasonable one." Id. In determining whether an unreasonable risk exists, a manufacturer should examine the

(i) utility of the product, or the utility of the aspect of the product that causes the risk;

(ii) the level of exposure of consumers to the risk;

(iii) the nature and severity of the hazard presented; and

(iv) the likelihood of resulting serious injury or death.

Id. And a "firm should also evaluate the state of the manufacturing or scientific art, the availability of alternative designs or products, and the feasibility of eliminating the risk."

Id. If a company discovers that one of its products poses "an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death," the company "should not wait for such serious injury or death to actually occur before reporting." 16 C.F.R. §1115.6(a). A company may obtain such information, triggering the duty to report, from experts, test reports, lawsuits or claims, complaints, quality control data, or any other relevant information. Id.

Reporting Timing

Once a duty to report under section 15(b) arises, a company must do so immediately. 15 U.S.C. §2064(b). As a general rule, "immediately" means that a company must inform the CPSC within 24 hours of obtaining information that reasonably supports the conclusion that a product does not comply with CPSC regulations, a product defect generates a substantial product hazard, or a product creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death.

Although a company may conduct a reasonably expeditious investigation to evaluate the existence of reportable information, the investigation should not take more than 10 days unless the company can demonstrate why more time is reasonable. 16 C.F.R. §115.14(d). However, the 24-hour period will begin the moment that a firm obtains information implicating a duty to report under section 15(b). 16 C.F.R. §115.14(e).

Penalties for Failing to Report

The CPSA, section 19, makes it unlawful for a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer to fail to report to the CPSC in accordance with section 15(b). 15 U.S.C. §2068(a)(4). So any person who knowingly fails to furnish the required information under the section 15(b) reporting requirements is subject to civil penalties. 15 U.S.C. §2069.

"Knowing" means "the having of actual knowledge" or "the presumed having of knowledge deemed to be possessed by a reasonable man who acts in the circumstances, including knowledge obtainable upon the exercise of due care to ascertain the truth of representations." 15 U.S.C. §2069(d); 15 U.S.C. §1264(c)(5). This "known or should have known" standard is a low threshold. Thus, if a company had information about a product, and if a reasonable person based on that same information would have perceived the product to pose a hazard, and the company failed to report to the CPSC, the regulations deems it a "knowing failure to report" and a violation subject to a civil penalty.

In addition to seeking civil penalties from a company that violates the CPSC regulations, those individuals responsible for the violation may face criminal penalties if the commission deems the violation knowing and willful: "Any individual director, officer, or agent of a corporation who knowingly and willfully authorizes, orders, or performs any of the acts or practices constituting in whole or in part a violation of section 19 shall be subject to penalties under this section without regard to any penalties to which that corporation may be subject." 15 U.S.C. §2070(b) (emphasis added). A "criminal violation" is one for which a violator is sentenced to pay a fine, to imprisonment, or both. 15 U.S.C. §2070(c)(2). A criminal violation may include the forfeiture of assets associated with the violation. 15 U.S.C. §2070(c) (1). Violations of section 19 are punishable by (1) imprisonment for not more than five years, (2) a fine determined under 18 U.S.C. §3571, or (3) both. See 15 U.S.C. §2070(a)(1). United States Code, specifically 18 U.S.C. §3571, contains the criminal procedure provision setting forth the maximum fines that the CPSC may seek from a corporation or individual when found guilty of various offense categories.

Increased Penalties Under the CPSIA

Although before Congress enacted the CPSIA companies were penalized for failing to comply with section 15(b) reporting requirements, the CPSIA significantly increased the dollar amounts. The maximum penalty for a knowing failure to inform the CPSC increased from $8,000 for each violation to $100,000 for each violation. 15 U.S.C. §2068(a)(4); 15 U.S.C. §2069(a)(1). Violations "shall constitute a separate offense with respect to each consumer product involved," and the maximum penalty increased from $1,825,000 to $15,000,000 for a related series of violations. 15 U.S.C. §2069(a)(1). The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has interpreted "each consumer product" to mean that "a company commits a separate offense for every potentially dangerous unit it fails to report." United States v. Mirama Enterprises, 387 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 2004). This means that a civil penalty could theoretically reach a sizeable amount even if a company only distributes a small number of units of a product.

The CPSIA's most notable change to the laws authorizing criminal penalties removed a provision from the Consumer Product Safety Act that required the CPSC to notify an offending party that it had violated a consumer product rule or regulation. If, after receiving notice, the offending party continued to violate the rule or regulation, then the CPSC could seek criminal penalties. Prior notice of prohibited conduct is no longer required, and the CPSC simply may impose criminal penalties upon finding that a violation is knowing and willful.

Factors Considered

The CPSC is required to take into account various factors relating to the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of a violation in determining the amount of a civil penalty, including:

  • The nature of the product defect. The commission will consider the nature of the product defect associated with a CPSA violation. This consideration will include, for example, whether the defect arises from the product's design, composition, contents, construction, manufacture, packaging, warnings, or instructions, and will include consideration of conditions or circumstances in which the defect arises;
  • The severity of the risk of injury. The commission will consider, among other factors, the potential for serious injury, illness, or death (and whether any injury or illness required medical treatment including hospitalization or surgery); the likelihood of injury; the intended or reasonably foreseeable use or misuse of the product; and the population at risk (including vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, or those with disabilities);
  • The occurrence or absence of injury. The commission will consider whether injuries, illnesses, or deaths have or have not occurred with respect to any product or substance associated with a violation, and, if so, the number and nature of injuries, illnesses, or deaths. Both acute illnesses and the likelihood of chronic illnesses will be considered;
  • The number of defective products distributed. The commission will consider the number of defective products or amount of substance distributed in commerce. The statutory language makes no distinction between those defective products distributed in commerce that consumers received and those defective products distributed in commerce that consumers have not received. Therefore both could be considered in appropriate cases. This factor will not be used to penalize a person's decision to conduct a wider-than- necessary recall out of an abundance of caution;
  • The appropriateness of such penalty in relation to the size of the business of the person charged, including how to mitigate undue adverse economic impacts on small businesses. The commission is required to consider the size of the business of the person charged in relation to the amount of the penalty. The commission may look to several factors including, but not limited to, the number of employees, net worth, and annual sales. A business's size and a business's ability to pay a penalty are separate considerations. In some cases for small businesses, however, these two considerations may relate to each other. The commission must consider how to mitigate undue adverse economic impacts on small businesses;
  • Such other factors as appropriate. Both the commission and the party charged may raise factors they believe are relevant in determining an appropriate penalty amount. The commission will look at a totality of the circumstances in making a penalty determination. Other factors may include, but are not limited to, whether the violator has a history of noncompliance, programs the violator has implemented to prevent noncompliance or safety violations, whether the violator gained economically from the failure to comply, and whether the violator responds timely to the commission's requests for information or remedial action.

See 15 U.S.C. §2069(b); 16 C.F.R. §1119.4. "Any civil penalty... may be compromised by the Commission" upon consideration of the above factors. 15 U.S.C. §2069(c).

Preventing and Mitigating Penalties

Companies can reduce the risk of violating reporting obligations by creating strong compliance systems and present mitigating factors to the commission to reduce penalties if the commission does seek them for violations.

Compliance Systems

Companies can reduce the risk of violating reporting obligations and incurring penalties by developing systems for ensuring compliance with CPSC regulations. A company should design a compliance program to establish, monitor, and maintain protocols for identifying product hazards or noncompliance and reporting to the CPSC.

It is vital to remember that a company can have a duty to report before it verifies that a hazard does exist. If a company has information sufficient to reasonably support the conclusion that a defect could create a substantial product hazard, then the company has a duty to report that information to the CPSC. A company must report that information immediately. As previously explained, a company should adopt a policy of reporting whenever it is uncertain whether an obligation to report exists. If a company later determines that a defect does not in fact create a substantial product hazard, it can inform the CPSC of that determination. However, if a company does not report a potential hazard and later determines that one does exist, the company has already violated its reporting obligations and may face penalties.

Companies should identify a team of individuals to take on responsibility for product safety compliance. This compliance team should include the persons responsible for monitoring the compliance program and keeping track of safety incidents involving a company's products, as well as members of relevant departments within the company, such as the product safety, legal, public relations, and marketing departments. A compliance coordinator should lead the team, and a company should assign responsibility to him or her for ensuring that the company follows compliance policies and procedures. The compliance coordinator should communicate with the CPSC and be the contact point for information or incident reports sent to the company from the CPSC. See John Kuppens, Paula Burlison, & Thomas Graham, The 'Wooden Approach' to Consumer Product Safety: How to Maximize Risk Prevention, DRI In-House Defense Quarterly (Spring 2010) (discussing compliance programs in-depth).

A company should establish procedures to identify and keep track of potential hazards that will follow up on safety indicators such as customer complaints and customer incident reports. A company should have clear guidelines for reporting hazards, both within the company and to the CPSC, and for determining whether a recall is necessary. A company should prepare in advance to evaluate the many issues that may require immediate action if the company must recall a product, such as needing to stop production, to isolate a product, and to inform distributors, retailers, consumers, and the media about the danger. Again, a company's compliance coordinator should be the point-person handling those communications and should have guidelines directing when and how to report to the CPSC.

Mitigating Penalties

It is important to note that a company's voluntary cooperation with the CPSC or voluntarily initiated recall of a product does not immunize that company from liability for penalties. A company that initiates a voluntary recall of a hazardous product is still subject to scrutiny. The CPSC will investigate the circumstances leading up to a voluntary recall to determine whether the company timely reported the defect. If the CPSC conducts a post-recall investigation that means that a Compliance Division staffer likely flagged the matter for review to determine if penalties are appropriate. If so, the Compliance Division already has determined informally that evidence may exist that a company should have filed a report earlier.

A company that realizes that it has untimely reported a product hazard can mitigate resulting penalties. Openly cooperating with the CPSC can be a factor that the CPSC will consider in determining an appropriate penalty, and communicating with the CPSC at this point is as important as ever. Requesting to meet with the CPSC staff in person to respond to issues and inquiries can be an effective way to build a line of communication and establish credibility.

A company can also use the same factors considered by the CPSC in determining an appropriate penalty to mitigate a penalty. However, a company has responsibility for providing the commission with mitigating factor information. For example, when considering how to mitigate an undue adverse impact from a penalty on a small business, the company has the burden to present clear, reliable, relevant, and sufficient evidence relating to the business's size and ability to pay a penalty. 16 C.F.R. §1119.4.

Presenting evidence of a robust compliance system such as the type discussed above may also help mitigate a penalty. If a company can show the CPSC that it has good systems in place that it rigorously adheres to, even if that system failed for explainable reasons in a particular instance that will not likely reoccur, then the company can establish a pattern of good faith rules and regulations compliance efforts. If defiance deterrence is the purpose of penalties, then penalizing a company that maintains rigorous compliance standards and proactively operates in a genuine effort to comply with rules and regulations will have little utility.

Presenting evidence that a company has a good track record of reporting to the CPSC and evidence that the commission has not penalized a company for violations in the past also helps. In addition, offering good procedures for, and a good history of, informing the public and those in the chain of distribution to eliminate a product danger will show a commitment to protecting consumers.

Penalty Settlement and Compromise

Since Congress enacted the CPSIA in 2008 the CPSC has used its enhanced enforcement authority and has sought substantial penalties ranging from $25,000 to $2.3 million. Usually, a civil penalty amount results from a compromise between the commission and a company based on the factors discussed above. Reviewing the settlement agreements published in the Federal Register has revealed that settlement agreements often include a provision in which a company denies that a particular product contained a defect creating a product hazard or that the company knowingly violated its reporting obligations. Often, a company will pay a penalty over time. The penalty settlement for Winter Bee, Inc., for selling children's hooded sweatshirts with drawstrings in violation of a CPSC ban on drawstrings in children's clothing, is a good example of compromising. The CPSC not only found that Winter Bee violated a drawstring ban and thus the Federal Hazardous Substance Act section 15(c) and 15 U.S.C. §1274(c), but it also found that Winter Bee violated its reporting requirements under section 15(b) by failing to immediately report the substantially hazardous sweatshirts that it had sold. See Winter Bee, Inc., Provisional Acceptance of a Settlement Agreement and Order, 75 Fed. Reg. 76,405 (U.S. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n Dec. 8, 2010).

Winter Bee settled its civil penalty with the CPSC. The agreement imposed a $200,000 penalty on Winter Bee, suspending all except $40,000, which the company agreed to pay in four installments over 20 months. Id. Winter Bee had instituted a voluntary recall of the hazardous sweatshirts upon discovering the violation, but it did not inform the CPSC until four months after initiating recall measures. According to Commissioner Nancy Nord, the commission did not impose the penalty against Winter Bee "for selling the hazardous product but for not telling [the CPSC] about it in a timely manner." Statement of Commissioner Nancy Nord on the Proposed Civil Penalty Settlement for Winter Bee, Inc. (U.S. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n Dec. 1, 2010), http://www.cpsc.gov/ pr/statements.html (then scroll to "Commissioner Nancy A. Nord").

Notably, Commissioner Nord opposed the proposed Winter Bee settlement. She disagreed with the commission staff's application of the penalty factors. Specifically, the settlement agreement showed that the staff asserted that Winter Bee's violation warranted a penalty of $200,000 but would only require Winter Bee to pay $40,000 due to the firm's inability to pay more. See id. Commissioner Nord suggested that applying the penalty factors led to a penalty of $40,000, not $200,000, because the staff should have considered company's size and ability to pay in determining an appropriate penalty. She believed that appropriately applying penalty factors, would lead to a $40,000 penalty and, accordingly, mitigation should have reduced that amount. Id.

Negative Exposure

The damage that a penalty can do to a company's public image or to a particular brand can often outweigh the financial burden of paying the penalty. While the commission will confidentially hold reports submitted under section 15(b) and protect them from public disclosure, generally it will not keep penalties imposed for failing to furnish such information confidential. The CPSC is generally prohibited from disclosing to the public information submitted to the commission in accordance with a company's reporting requirements under section 15(b), unless (1) the CPSC has issued a complaint and instituted a proceeding alleging that a product presents a substantial product hazard; (2) in lieu of a proceeding against a product, the CPSC has accepted in writing a remedial settlement agreement dealing with the product; (3) the person submitting the information agrees to public disclosure; or (4) the commission publishes a finding that the public health and safety requires public disclosure foregoing the required period of notice. 15 U.S.C. §2055(b)(5).

Unless public health and safety require disclosure without notice, the CPSC notifies a company of its intent to disclose information that will permit the public to ascertain readily the identity of the company 15 days before disclosure, to give the company an opportunity to respond and comment on the proposed disclosure. 15 U.S.C. §2055(b). But the commission should not disclose trade secrets or otherwise confidential business information. 15 U.S.C. §2055(a).

Penalties for failing to furnish the information required under section 15(b), however, are published in the Federal Register and on the CPSC website. In addition, all commission settlement agreements are published in the Federal Register. Although a company may be able to negotiate language in a settlement agreement that softens the negative public impact, generally the company will not be able to prevent the commission from publishing the settlement agreement.


The CPSC now has increased powers to impose civil and criminal penalties against companies for tardy reporting, and it is exercising those powers with vigor. To prevent violations and the resulting penalties companies will need to take proactive measures to comply with reporting requirements. If a company becomes the subject of a post-recall investigation, it should not only defend the timing of its reporting decision but also marshal evidence to mitigate penalties that the commission staff may assess that a violation warrants.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.