Donoghue v Stevenson: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{cite|Donoghue|Stevenson|1932|AC|532}} is a case so beloved of law students that the 1932 volume of the Appeals Cases falls open at page 532. Along with the leaking resevoir of {{casenote|Rylands|Fletcher}} it is one of the founding cases of the law of {{tag|negligence}}. | {{cite|Donoghue|Stevenson|1932|AC|532}} is a case, concerning snails and ginger-beer, which is so beloved of law students that the 1932 volume of the Appeals Cases falls open at page 532. Along with the leaking resevoir of {{casenote|Rylands|Fletcher}} it is one of the founding cases of the law of {{tag|negligence}}. | ||
*Spod fact: I own a copy of the 1932 Appeals Cases, but evidently it has not seen active service in any library populated by live students, apparently has never been read, and so it doesn't fall open at page 532. Yet. It was quite an expensive experiment to get the wrong answer. | *Spod fact: I own a copy of the 1932 Appeals Cases, but evidently it has not seen active service in any library populated by live students, apparently has never been read, and so it doesn't fall open at page 532. Yet. It was quite an expensive experiment to get the wrong answer. | ||
Revision as of 14:12, 3 April 2019
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 532 is a case, concerning snails and ginger-beer, which is so beloved of law students that the 1932 volume of the Appeals Cases falls open at page 532. Along with the leaking resevoir of Rylands v Fletcher it is one of the founding cases of the law of negligence.
- Spod fact: I own a copy of the 1932 Appeals Cases, but evidently it has not seen active service in any library populated by live students, apparently has never been read, and so it doesn't fall open at page 532. Yet. It was quite an expensive experiment to get the wrong answer.