Seminar Week 9 Problem[1]

Seminar Week 9 Problem[1] - Seminar Week 9 Section A The...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Seminar Week 9 Section A The parties that involved in this case are: John Joe Hot water bottle manufacturer Shop owner On first assessment, the most obvious case that may be taken would be that of John & Joe v Hot water bottle manufacturer. John in buying the product had entered into a contract and therefore the manufacture owed him an amount of responsibility that there would be no causation of harm to him from the product. If there has been a fault in the product, then it can be brought that the manufacturer has been negligent. Before Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), only John would have been able to sue and claim damages for injury to him as he was the purchaser and therefore it was he who formed the contract. Joe would have been unable to claim as he had no contract. The case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) mirrors the scenario to this case as the manufacturer was proven to be liable to provide a duty of care with its products, that if
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 2

Seminar Week 9 Problem[1] - Seminar Week 9 Section A The...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online