Photo has been used for illustrative purpose.

Aya El Deeb, Staff Reporter

A woman sued a car manufacturer, demanding that it pay her Dhs50,000 as a compensation for the injuries she sustained due to a malfunction in the airbag installed in her car.

The plaintiff explained that she had bought a 2015-model car for Dhs167,000 with a warranty for 2023.

However in June 2021, the steering wheel’s airbag inflated due to a collision, and then exploded.

It resulted in a gas leak that caused second degree burns to the plaintiff’s left arm.

In her lawsuit, the plaintiff indicated that the burns were due to a manufacturing error in the airbag, which caused physical and material damage to her.

She underwent treatment in a hospital and absented from work.

She was also unable to use her arm for her daily needs. On the other hand, the manufacturer confirmed that it had nothing to do with the injuries sustained by the vehicle’s owner, emphasising the validity and effectiveness of the safety systems installed in the vehicle.

It said the injuries were caused by the accident.

The court assigned an engineering expert, who confirmed in his report the presence of black holes in the airbag, which led to the emission of hot gases, due to a manufacturing error in the airbag.

The airbag inflated correctly when the collision took place, but due to an error in it, burning gases emitted from the bag through holes with dust particles and metal fragments, which caused burns to the plaintiff’s Abaya and to her arm, the report added.

The plaintiff later contacted the company insuring the car to inspect it.

The company decided to cancel the car, as there was no point in repairing it, and compensated the plaintiff with the insurance value of Dhs35,000.

The car was sold in public auction as scrap material.

The Court of the First Instance obliged the manufacturer to pay the woman Dhs40,000 in compensation for the material and moral damage she sustained.

The manufacturer appealed the ruling, confirming its invalidity, due to its reliance on a defective and inexperienced report, and for not inviting the vehicle company officials to attend the inspection.

 The court rejected the appeal, because the security deposit was not deposited when the appeal was registered, and ordered the manufacturer to pay the fees.