• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

NEGLIGENCE & DUTY OF CARE - The leading case in Negligence is the case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)

Extracts from this document...


The leading case in Negligence is the case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) This case explains that, Mrs Donoghue and her friend went to a cafe in Paisley. At the cafe, Mrs Donoghues' friend bought her a drink which was a ginger beer float consisting of ginger beer that was in an opaque bottle. After Mrs Donoghue drank out of the drink in a beer cup, her friend topped up the drink, and then they found in the ginger beer bottle a decomposed remains of a snail. Mrs Donoghue claimed that the memories of seeing the snail in the ginger beer she had already drunk made her ill. ...read more.


The question was that "who then in law is my neighbour? The answer was that anyone who is closely and directly affected by your act, to reasonably have them in contemplation as being affected when you are directed to a act. Duty of care This was brought to existence by Lord Bridge in Caparon Industries v Dickman (1990) in this case: The test in this case was that it must be clarified whether the loss was foreseeable i.e. if it could have been prevented as in case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) in the neighbour principle. If the loss was foreseeable, whether there was a sufficient relationship of proximity between the parties should be taken into consideration. ...read more.


* Foreseeability of risk which states that there is no obligation on the defendant for risk other than those within reasonable contemplation. It is unfair to impose liability where risk was unforeseeable as in the case of Roe v minister of health (1954. * Magnitude or degree of risk which states that the care expected depends on the likelihood of the risk as in the case of Bolton v stone (1951). * Experts of professional. * Practicality or prevention (of the risk). Causation In English law, causation is linked to be established between the breach and the resulting damage i.e. on link no liability. In often time, there is no problem when a link is shown because it is fairly obvious that the injury sustained was caused by the negligence. ?? ?? ?? ?? NEGLIGENCE & DUTY OF CARE ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    Matthew Cubbin v Stephen Minnis (2000) is the case of a 24 year old male who received �18500 for a fracture to his right leg. These injuries occurred in the player's work place, as they play football for a living.

  2. Law- Negligence

    and the owners of a guest house in Walton v North Cornwall District Council [1997]. Problems have arisen with Hedley Byrne duties of care as statements, whether oral or written, are often passed on and can easily reach an "indeterminate class".

  1. Gross negligence and recklessness.

    causing death by dangerous driving contrary to s.1 Road Traffic Act 1972 - he had been driving a motor cycle at speeds between 60-80 mph in a town street when he knocked over and killed a pedestrian crossing the road.

  2. What is the meaning of intention in English criminal law? Is it always possible ...

    Baroness Wootton agrees on this point (along with may other points made by Lord Diplock) by saying "If the law says that certain things are not to be done, it is illogical to confine this prohibition to occasions on which they are done from malice aforethought: for at least the

  1. Free essay

    Kates case falls under civil litigation in the category of negligence. She was served ...

    but he is liable too for the existence of a faulty product. Product liability can be demanded from any manufacturer or retailer of a product that has caused bodily damage. In most cases strict liability claims have limited the possible defense against a product liability claim since the liability policy

  2. British Law in Health and Social Care

    (Holdsworth, 2006) Common Law Common law forms a major part of England's law. It covers common crimes that happen on a day to day basis and have always existed such as rape, assault, murder and theft. Common law is law created and refined by judges: a decision in a currently

  1. In this report, the differences between contractual liability and tortuous liability are explained. In ...

    The rule in Rylands vs. Fletcher applies strict liability on occupier. A person brings and keeps on land in his occupation anything likely to do mischief if it escapes must keep it in at his peril. If fail to do so, he is liable for all damage naturally accruing from

  2. Tort law assignment. Brian fell against the standard of care a reasonable man would ...

    would rely on that skill. The claimant receiving the advice must have acted in reliance on it as longs as it was reasonable to rely on the advice. To establish whether there was a special relationship between Brian and John the meaning of a special relationship must be looked at.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work