Law Cases > Tort Law Cases > Standards of duty of care Cases

Mansfield v Weetabix Ltd

[1998] 1 WLR 1263

Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 11:57 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Mansfield v Weetabix Ltd

D didn’t realise he had hypoglycaemia and didn’t realise that his ability had been severely impaired. He crashed into P’s shop who sued him for negligence. HL said that the standard of the duty of care was that of a “reasonably competent driver unaware that he was or might be suffering from a condition that impaired his ability to drive.” If no “awareness” was considered it would be a strict liability test. In this case he could not reasonably have been aware of his condition.

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Tort Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
Covers all major cases for LLB exams
Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
Recently updated

Tort Law Notes >>

Tort Law Notes