The K-Zone: Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)

[1932] AC 562 (HL). If this is not the most famous case in British legal history, it must be one of the most famous. This case is often credited with establishing the modern law of Negligence, despite that it was not even a full trial, and that Lord Atkins' celebrated remarks might strictly be considered obiter (arguably, the ratio of the case is limited to product liability). The case concerned whether the manufacturer of bottled soft drinks could be held liable for an injury caused to the consumer. There was little doubt that had the purchaser of the drink been harmed by it, she would have been able to recover from the retailer for breach of contract; the retailer in turn would probably have been able to recover from the supplier. The question at issue was whether it was possible to recover in tort, absent a contractual relationship, since it was not the purchaser that suffered the injury.

The defendants' argument was that suppliers' liability to consumers in tort for defective products was simply unknown to British law, and there was no case to be tried. The case heard by the House concerned simply whether there was, in fact, a case to be tried; there was no actual trial of the facts. The House decided, by a bare majority, that there was a case to be tried. It held that a principle could be drawn from prior authorities, that any person could be liable for harm to any other person, given certain conditions were met. It is the speech of Lord Atkins that was most influential, in particular these lines, that every law student probably knows by heart:

``You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be - persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.''

This `neighbour principle' was, and to a certain extent still is, the foundation of the modern law of negligence. For more information, see DutyOfCare.

CaseLaw