CASE STUDY :

Evans v. Robinson

On Saturday, September 10th, Mrs. Evans sat in a caf with a friend. The friend ordered and paid for some ginger beer, which came in a bottle made from dark opaque glass. Evans drank some of the contents then her friend proceeded to pour the remainder of the contents of the bottle into the tumbler when a snail, which was beginning to rot, floated out of the bottle.

Mrs. Evans claimed that she was made ill both by what she had seen and by what she feared she had eaten: namely, the rotting carcass of a presumed gastropod. She later fell ill and a physician diagnosed her with gastroenteritis. She commenced a claim against the manufacturer of the ginger beer.

The case went all the way to the House of Lords where they ruled for Evans. It was the speech of Lord Wright that was most influential. He said: ``You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbor. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be - 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 or omissions which are called in question.

'' This `neighbour principle' was, and to a certain extent still is, the foundation of the modern law of negligence

Question:

1.The facts?

2.The issue(s)?

3.The court's decision?

4.The court's reasoning supporting the decision?

5.Conclusion: Do you agree with the outcome? Why or why not?

Justify your answer?

a)Agree/not?

b)Why or why not?

c)Your own personal justification/rationale expanding on why or why not?