(NOT SO) LUDICROUS LITIGATION | DONOGHUE V STEVENSON

Welcome to (not so) Ludicrous Litigation, in which we cover infamous legal cases and explain the rationale behind them! This month we bring you Donoghue v Stevenson, a case in which an elderly woman sued the manufacturing company of a root beer her friend had bought her after discovering a decomposing snail in the bottle. Sounds unreasonable? Turns out it was actually the best course of action, as the court found in her favor!

When Mrs Donoghue, the claimant, contracted gastroenteritis and nervous shock after having the snail root beer with some ice cream, the law did not recognize the existence of any contractual relationship between a manufacturer and consumer, so she could not sue them for breach of contract. Likewise, she could not sue the cafe where the beer had been bought, because the transaction had technically happened between her friend (not her) and the cafe.

However, the House of Lords agreed that she deserved some form of compensation and that it was appropriate to induce some tortious liability. Hence, Lord Atkin defined the neighbor principle: “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.” The claimant need not be personally known to the defendant, as long as they fall within a class of persons to whom the risk of harm is foreseeable.

On the facts, consumers of the manufacturer’s end product can be considered their “neighbor” because it is obvious that if the manufacturer fails to uphold quality control standards, consumers will suffer; therefore, manufacturers should hold their customers in contemplation. This case is important not just for modern consumer rights, but also the entire tort of negligence as it established the idea that a “duty of care” could be owed between people, from road users to doctors and patients.