Lord Atkin established the neighbour principle in Donoghue v Stevenson. The neighbour principle determines whether a duty of care exists by asking if a reasonable person would foresee that their actions could adversely affect another. In Donoghue, the manufacturer (D) had a duty of care towards the consumer (P) because D could reasonably foresee that selling contaminated ginger beer could injure P. P became ill after finding a decomposed snail in the ginger beer bottle. The neighbour principle held D negligent for failing to properly inspect bottles before filling them, breaching the duty of care owed to P.

1. NUR FARHANA BINTI ABDUL KARIM
2011852268
LWA 02K

2. Explain the test laid down by
Lord Atkin in Donoghue v
Stevenson [ 1932] AC 562

3. WHAT THE QUESTION WANTS?
Test = neighbour principle
Explain the neighbour principle and
the application of this principle in the
case of Donoghue.

4. Case: Donoghue v Stevenson
The D, a gingerbeer manufacturer, had sold gingerbeer drinks to a
retailer. The gingerbeer bottles were opaque. A bought a bottle and
entertained a friend, the P, who drank the gingerbeer. When A
refilled the glass, along with the gingerbeer came the decomposed
remains of a snail. The P suffered shock and was severely ill as a
consequence. The P sued the manufacturer, and claimed that the
manufacturer had a duty in the course of his business, to prevent
snails from entering into his gingerbeer bottles and further that a
duty to ensure all the empty bottles were carefully inspected
before they were filled with gingerbeer. The issue was whether the
D owed such a duty to the P

5. Donoghue v Stevenson is often referred to as the "Paisley
snail" or the "snail in the bottle" case, and is one of the
most famous decisions in legal history in Great Britain.

6. Held :
This case was a decision of the House of Lords that
established the modern concept of negligence by setting
out general principles whereby one person would owe
another person a duty of care. Per Lord Atkin has used
the ‘neighbour principle’ to solve this case.

7.  What is neighbour principle?
Test to determine the existence of a duty of care
whereby if a person does not take the usual degree of
precaution, another person of his property maybe injured
or damaged. Duty of care is the first element of
negligence.
Would a reasonable man, who is in the same
circumstances as the D, foresee that his conduct will
adversely affect the P.

8. Example:
A negligence of security guard on a certain residential
area would resulted in danger to the people’s live in that
area.
In this case : The security guard has the duty of care
towards the residents at that area

9. Who is neighbour ?
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
* Directly affected by my act

10. Example :
The restaurant owners have the duty of care
to make sure that the restaurant is always
clean especially in the kitchen as it can be
foresee that their negligence in their
services may effect or causing injuries to the
customers (neighbour).

11. APPLICATION OF NEIGHBOUR PRINCIPLE IN THE CASE OF
DONOUGHUE
According to this principle, The D, a gingerbeer
manufacturer has a duty of care towards the P .
WHY?
A manufacturer of the gingerbeer product, which he sells in such
a form as to show that he intends them to reach the knowledge
that the absence of reasonable care in the preparation or putting
up of products will result in an injury to the consumer's life or
property, owes a duty to the consumer to take that reasonable
care.

12.  In this case, the D did not make sure that their
products is clean and safe to be consume as the
decomposed snail had been found in the
gingerbeer drink by the P. P suffered severely ill
as consequences.
 The P can sue D for his negligence

13. THE END….