Donoghue v Stevenson Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Below are a number of statements about the case of Donoghue v Stevenson:

(i) Prior to the case a duty of care was generally only owed in contractual relationships
(ii) A contractual duty was owed to Donoghue’s friend who had bought the ginger beer for her
(iii) The friend could have sued the manufacturer, Stevenson, for the breach of duty
(iv) Donoghue was able to succeed because the ratio decidendi of the case established that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the end consumer of his products

A

(i) Prior to the case a duty of care was generally only owed in contractual relationships
(ii) A contractual duty was owed to Donoghue’s friend who had bought the ginger beer for her
(iv) Donoghue was able to succeed because the ratio decidendi of the case established that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the end consumer of his products

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Which of the following is not one of the elements identified by Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson as requiring proof for a successful claim in negligence?

a) the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the claimant
b) malicious intent on the part of the defendant to harm the claimant
c) a breach of the duty owed by the defendant
d) damage to the claimant caused by the defendant’s breach of duty

A

b) malicious intent on the part of the defendant to harm the claimant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q
  1. Which of the following would best suit Lord Atkin’s description of a neighbour in the ‘neighbour test’ from Donoghue v Stevenson in the tort of negligence?
    a) a person in close physical proximity to the claimant
    b) a person who knows the claimant
    c) a person whose acts or omissions will affect the claimant even though he could not foresee the effect
    d) a person whose acts or omissions will foreseeably affect the claimant
A

d) a person whose acts or omissions will foreseeably affect the claimant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What was the significance of the judgment of Lord Atkin Donoghue v Stevenson?

A

Lord Atkin created the neighbour principle. Under the neighbour principle, a duty of care arises, where there is sufficient ‘proximity’ of relationship between the parties and a foreseeability of damage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Why could the claimant in Donoghue not bring an action for breach of contract?

A

Mrs Donoghue was not able to claim through breach of contract as she was not party to any contract. Therefore, she issued proceedings against Stevenson, the manufacture. She also had not purchased the drink herself.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Could the decision have been different if the ginger beer bottle had been of a different type?

A

The bottle was opaque in colour and sealed so the snail could not be detected until Mrs Donoghue had already consumed a large part of the drink, if the bottle had been clear/see through the snail may have been detected before Mrs Donoghue had consumed the drink.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly