Negligence:
The case of Donoghue v. Stevenson is a landmark English tort law case that established the
modern law of negligence in English Common law. It was decided by the House of Lords in 1932.
Facts of the Case
The Plaintiff, Mrs. Donoghue, drank a bottle of ginger beer that contained a decomposed snail.
She became ill and sued the manufacturer, Stevenson, for negligence.
There was no contractual relationship between Donoghue and Stevenson, as she had purchased
the drink from a third party.
Legal Issues-
The main legal issue in the case was whether Stevenson owed Donoghue a duty of care in the
absence of a contractual relationship.
Decision-
The House of Lords held that Stevenson owed Donoghue a duty of care, even though there was
no contractual relationship between them.
Lord Atkin formulated the neighbor principle, which states that a person owes a duty of care to
“persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have
them in contemplation as being affected by my act.
The House of Lords held that Stevenson should have reasonably contemplated that the ginger
beer would be consumed by someone other than the purchaser and that reasonable care to
ensure that the product was safe for consumption.
Significance of the case-
Donoghue v Stevenson is a landmark case in English Tort law because it established the modern
law of negligence.
The case introduced the neighbor principle, which has been widely adopted in other common
law jurisdictions.
The case has had a significant impact on the development of consumer protection law.
Core concepts-
Negligence- A legal tort (civil wrong) that occurs when a person fails to exercise the degree of
care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation, resulting in harm to another
person.
Duty of Care- A legal obligation to take reasonable care to avoid causing harm to others.
The case of Donoghue v Stevenson, a landmark English tort law case, introduced several key
legal terms and concepts that have become integral to the field of negligence law.
Here are some of the most significant legal terms used in the case:
Key Legal Principles-
Reasonable foreseeability- A test used to determine whether a defendant should have
reasonably anticipated that their actions could cause harm to another person.
Causation- The Legal principle that a defendant’s negligence must have been the direct cause of
the plaintiff’s harm.
These terms and concepts have been influential in shaping the modern law of negligence and
continue to be relevant in legal discussions and cases today.
Conclusion in Donoghue v Stevenson
The landmark case of Donoghue v Stevenson established a significant precedent in English tort
law, particularly in the area of negligence. The House of Lords concluded that:
Duty of care: A manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of their product,
even if there is no direct contractual relationship between them. This duty extends to ensuring
that the product is safe for its intended use.
Negligence: The manufacturer was negligent in failing to exercise reasonable care in the
preparation of their product, which resulted in a harmful substance being present.
Liability: The manufacturer is liable for the harm caused to the consumer, even though there
was no contractual relationship between them.
This decision marked a significant expansion of the law of negligence and has had a profound
impact on consumer protection laws worldwide. It established the principle that manufacturers
have a responsibility to ensure the safety of their products, regardless of the contractual
relationship between the manufacturer and the consumer.
Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) is a foundational case in tort law, particularly in establishing the
modern law of negligence.
