Search results
Grant v Australian Knitting Mills is a landmark case in consumer and negligence law from 1935, holding that where a manufacturer knows that a consumer may be injured if the manufacturer does not take reasonable care, the manufacturer owes a duty to the consumer to take that reasonable care.
Key points. Manufacturers are liable in negligence for injury caused to the ultimate consumer by latent defects in their products. The mere unproven possibility of tampering by a third party between the time at which a product was shipped by a manufacturer and the time at which it reached the consumer does not erase the duty of care of the ...
Jan 4, 2024 · The court held that the manufacturer owed a duty of care to the consumer because Australian Knitting mills knew that the consumer’s health would be jeopardized if the clothing were not prepared with reasonable care.
Nov 28, 2023 · The court held that retailers were liable for a breach of implied warranty or condition under Section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1895 of South Australia. This section is similar to Section 14 of the English Sale of Goods Act, 1893.
Jul 7, 2023 · In the case of Grant v Australian Knitting Mills 1936 ac 85, it was held that manufacturers were liable in negligence caused to a consumer by latent defects in their own products.
Dec 25, 2023 · Grant v Australian Knitting Mills is a landmark case in consumer and negligence law from 1935, holding that where a manufacturer knows that a consumer may be injured if the manufacturer does not take reasonable care, the manufacturer owes a duty to the consumer to take that reasonable care.
He brought his action against the respondents, claiming damages on the ground, that he had contracted dermatitis by reason of the improper condition of underwear purchased by him from the respondents, John Martin and Co., Ltd., and manufactured by the respondents, the Australian Knitting Mills Limited; the case was tried by Sir George Murray ...
Aug 18, 2014 · ON 18 AUGUST 1933, the High Court of Australia delivered Australian Knitting Mills Ltd v Grant [1933] HCA 35; (1933) 50 CLR 387 (18 August 1933). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1933/35.html Per Dixon J at 418: "The condition that goods are of merchantable quality requires that they should be in such an actual state that a buyer ...
ON 18 AUGUST 1933, the High Court of Australia delivered Australian Knitting Mills Ltd v Grant [1933] HCA 35; (1933) 50 CLR 387 (18 August 1933). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1933/35.html Per Dixon J at 418: 'The condition that goods are of merchantable quality requires that they should be in such an actual state that a buyer ...
Sep 3, 2013 · Product liability – retailers and manufacturers held liable for skin irritation caused by knitted garment. The Facts. A chemical residue in a knitted undergarment caused severe dermatitis. Findings. In a prolonged trial the Supreme Court of Southern Australia (Murray CJ) found both retailers and manufacturers liable.
