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 · A case on Sale of Goods Act, 1930 involving a medical professional who developed dermatitis from defective underwear bought from retailers. The court held that the retailers breached the implied warranty or condition under Section 16 of the Act.
A medical man sued the manufacturer and retailer of underwear for causing his dermatitis by free sulphite in the fabric. The Privy Council upheld the appeal of the respondents, finding the evidence insufficient to prove negligence or breach of contract.
Facts: Grant purchased some woolen underwear manufactured by Australian Knitting Mills. When he wore the underwear, Grant developed an itchy rash which became acute general dermatitis. The skin condition was caused by small particles of sulphur in the wool from which the underwear was made.
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.
