FACTS: “A” purchased a bottle of ginger-beer from a retailer for the appellant, a lady friend. Some of the contents were poured into a tumbler and consumed the same. When remaining contents of the bottle were poured into her tumbler, the decomposed body of snail floated out with her ginger-beer. The appellant alleged that she suffered in her health in consequence of having drunk a part of contaminated contents. The bottle was dark opaque glass and closed with a metal cap, so that contents could not be ascertained by inspection. She brought an action against the manufacturer for damage.

contention by defendant: one of the defences pleaded by defendants was that he did not owe any duty of care towards the plaintiff. Another defence pleaded was of ‘Privity of Contract’ that plaintiff was a stranger to the contract and her action was not maintainable.

ISSUE: Does the manufacturer owe a duty of care to end customer while he did not directly sell it to him, but only via a distributor?

Decision: The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed her a duty to take care that the bottle did not contain any noxious matter, and he would be liable on the breach of that duty. Privity of contract was done away with by Donohgue v. Stevenson by allowing consumer of drink to bring an action in tort against the manufurer between whom there was no contract.