The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed a duty of care to her, which was breached because it was reasonably foreseeable that failure to ensure the ... Judgment · Court of Session, Outer House · Significance

On 9th April 1929 Mrs Mary M'Alister or Donoghue brought an action against David Stevenson aerated water manufacturer Paisley, in which she claimed £500 as ...

The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed a duty of care to her, which was breached, because it was reasonably foreseeable that failure to ensure the ...

Donoghue v Stevenson is the landmark case in tort law. The wider importance of the case is that it established the general principle of the duty of care concept ...

4 сент. 2024 г. · This is a landmark judgment by the House of Lords which laid down the general principles of the duty of care in cases of negligence.

7 апр. 2023 г. · Holding; The House of Lords ultimately found in favour of Mrs Donoghue, holding that Mr Stevenson did owe a duty of care to her.

The purpose of this decision was to make reckless manufacturers liable for their dangerously defective products which cause personal injury to consumers. The ...

12 сент. 2024 г. · The iconic case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), AKA the "snail in a ... JUDGEMENT: The case was decided in favor of Mrs Donoghue, the ...

- The House of Lords (as it then was) held that the manufacturer (Stevenson - the Defendant) owed Mrs. Donoghue a duty of care not to cause her injury. This is ...