Bates v Batey & Company Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtKing's Bench Division
Year1913
Date1913

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
  • M'Alister or Donoghue (Pauper) v Stevenson
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 26 May 1932
    ...the duty owed to those who will be immediately injured by lack of care. The last case I need refer to is Bates v. Batey & Co., Ltd. ( 1913, 3 K.B., 351), where manufacturers of ginger beer were sued by a plaintiff who had been injured by the bursting of a bottle of ginger beer bought from ......
  • Anglo-Celtic Shipping Company, Ltd v Elliott and Jeffery and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • Invalid date
  • Cox v Burbridge
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Common Pleas
    • 14 January 1863
    ...opinion. It must be taken that the accident was not occasioned by any act of the child himself; and that the act was the actBates v. Batey, [1913] 3 K. B. 351. 1 3 72 COX V. BUEBIDGE r Cox v. burbidge Jan. 14th, 1863. . [S. C. 32 L. J. C. P. 89; 9 Jur. N. S. 970; 11 W. R. 435. See MtrLr ' v......
  • Pattendon v Beney
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division
    • Invalid date
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • The producer's liability in negligence
    • United Kingdom
    • Oxford University Press Books and Journals Product Liability (Third Edition) Part III. Liability in tort for negligence
    • Invalid date
    ...satisfactory quality and reasonable fitness for purpose also extend to the container and packaging. 128 (1933) 50 TLR 10. 129 Bates v Batey & Co Ltd [1913] 3 KB 351. 130 See the comments of Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, 595, HL. 131 As in Hill v James Crowe (Cases) Ltd [......
  • Introduction and modern historical outline
    • United Kingdom
    • Invalid date
    ...are common to all who supply or control the use of products are discussed in a later chapter.44 33 [1905] 1 KB 253. See also Bates v Batey & Co Ltd [1913] 3 KB 351; cf George v Skivington (1869) LR 5 Exch 34 (1842) 10 M&W 109, 152 ER 402. 35 [1905] 1 KB 253, 255. 36 ibid, 259. 37 (1842)......