One of the most famous English cases on negligence is the Donoghue v. Stevenson case.

It happened on the 26th August 1928, when Donoghues friend bought her a bottle of ginger beer from a cafe. It was claimed that the remains of a snail in a state of decomposition dropped out of the bottle into the tumbler and Donoghues doctor later proved that she was poisoned by drinking contents. On 9 April 1929, Donoghue brought an action against David Stevenson, the manufacturer, in which she claimed 500 as damages for injuries sustained by her through drinking ginger beer. In common law, a person can claim damages from another person where that other person owed the first person a duty of care and harmed that person through their conduct in breach of that duty. For example there must be a contract between two parties. However in this case, Mrs. Donoghue had no direct or indirect claim against the manufacturer based on contractual obligations because she did not purchase the product herself. Therefore the law did not provide a remedy for Donoghue. After several appeals, Donoghue was finally allowed to appeal her case to the House of Lords. Donoghues counsel argues that a manufacturer who puts a product intended for human consumption onto the market is liable for any damage caused if he fails to exercise reasonable care to ensure it is fit for human consumption. On the other hand, Stevensons counsel argues that there was no authority for such a principle law. The leading judgment was delivered on 26 May 1932 by Lord Atkin. The most famous section was his explanation of the neighbor principle, which said that you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbor. A neighbor is a person so closely connected with and directly affected by my act that I should have had them in mind when I committed the act. This means that the manufacturer should be held responsible to the people who drink its products and this responsibility do not need any contracts to be effective. Therefore, the plaintiff won in the end and received a remedy.