How Did A Court Case Change How Windscreens Were Designed?
The most important aspect of windscreen design is also the reason why it is prudent to have windscreen insurance to avoid being saddled with the complete cost of a replacement.
Windscreens can be expensive because they are often bespoke in their design and built to
incredible safety standards to ensure that they protect the occupants of a car in an accident, by stopping objects from entering the cockpit, stopping the driver from being launched from the vehicle and keeping some form of structural rigidity.
In combination with other standard safety features, the windscreen is a critical component that has saved countless lives but is also an expensive part to fix.
Part of the reason for this is how one particular court case changed how people considered and used windscreens. Rather fittingly, it involved a Mr Pane.
Pane V Ford
Up until the 1950s, windscreens were primarily designed to be primarily just for protecting the driver from the winds rushing past them, stopping small pieces of debris and insects from impacting the driver.
Even though Edouard Benedictus had developed and pioneered laminated safety glass as early as 1903 and had formed Triplex as early as 1911 to apply his technique to motoring, for the most part, windscreens consisted of a single sheet of plate glass.
During the early rise of motoring, when cars were affordable enough for most people to actually buy, this became an increasingly big problem, as car accidents were often made far worse by the glass, which would shatter into sharp pieces and cause lacerations.
One of these accidents inspired Mr Benedictus in the first place, having been moved by a car accident in France involving two women who were severely injured by flying glass shards, and another one led to a lawsuit that would indirectly set the stage for massive changes in the industry.
In 1917, Mr William Pane was involved in an accident where the shattering of the windscreen’s glass in his Model T Ford caused him serious enough injuries to sue the Ford Motor Company.
Whilst his case was just one of many that were brought by motorists against the cars that had maimed them, Pane V Ford was the one that would set the precedent and ultimately become a victory for drivers through losing.
The court found in favour of Ford, noting that Mr Pane’s reckless driving caused the accident that caused the glass to shatter and did not break the chain of causation. This case would lead to the dismissal of many similar cases around the same time.
However, whilst the battle to make manufacturers accountable for the safety of drivers was lost, the war was ultimately won. Even with the victory in court, Henry Ford was aware that the issue was far from settled.
If it was not Mr Pane’s reckless driving that had caused the glass to shatter but was instead an errant stone or piece of debris, there is a chance that the courts would find Ford liable, so he looked for a solution.
Ultimately, he would opt for laminated glass, demanding its use on every Ford car from 1919 until 1929.
Since then, it has been a given that cars have extremely tough windscreens that will break but not shatter to protect everyone inside.