Negligence In The Donoghue Vs. Stevenson's Case

Law of Torts is a civil wrong and is an unreasonable interference with the interests of others. Law of Torts provides protection against harmful conduct, it attempts to provide an impartial set of rules for resolving private disputes over claims of improper interference with individual rights. A common denominator of each Law of Tort is a failure on the defendant’s part to exercise the level of care that the law deems due to the plaintiff, and the normal remedy for this is unliquidated damages. Negligence is one of these Torts, it is an independent tort as it is an element for other torts. Negligence is causing loss by failure to take reasonable care when there is a duty to do so. To succeed in an action for negligence the plaintiff must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care to avoid

Donoghue became ill in consequence. She could not sue the shop as she had not bought the bottle but could sue the manufacture as during inspection the snail was not discovered in the bottle, which could lead and did lead to injury to a person, and was shipped off to market. The manufacture was held responsible due to the neighbour principle. The reasonable man linked to this case would be that the manufacturer should have determined that the standard care for everything depended on the circumstances and what should have been known or what was known by the defendant. So it was reasonably foreseeable that the contaminated product would lead to injury to a person upon consumption and the necessary precautions were not in place from the reasonable man which led to damages being sought. The reasonable man should employ precautions and skill necessary to the