Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 (HL)

Facts

Mrs Donoghue visited a café in Paisley with a friend. Her friend purchased a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by Mr Stevenson and gave it to Mrs Donoghue to drink. The bottle was made of opaque glass, so the contents could not be inspected before consumption.

After drinking some of the ginger beer, Mrs Donoghue discovered the remains of a decomposed snail inside the bottle. As a result, she became ill and suffered shock. Mrs Donoghue wished to bring a claim against the manufacturer, but she had no contractual relationship with him, as she had not purchased the drink herself.

---

Issue

The key legal issue was whether a manufacturer owes a duty of care in negligence to the ultimate consumer of a product, even where there is no contractual relationship between the parties.

---

Decision

The House of Lords, by a majority, held that the manufacturer did owe Mrs Donoghue a duty of care. The court accepted that it was reasonably foreseeable that a failure to take care in the manufacture of the product could cause harm to the consumer. Mrs Donoghue was therefore entitled to bring a claim in negligence.

---

Legal Principle

The case established the neighbour principle, set out by Lord Atkin. He stated that individuals must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which they can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure their neighbour.

A neighbour was defined as someone who is so closely and directly affected by the defendant’s actions that they ought reasonably to be in the defendant’s contemplation. This principle formed the basis of the modern duty of care in negligence.

---

Importance

• Established the modern concept of duty of care in negligence.

• Removed the need for a contractual relationship between claimant and defendant.

• Created the neighbour principle, which underpins later duty of care cases.

• Laid the foundation for the development of later tests, including Caparo v Dickman.