Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Weller v Foot & Mouth Disease Research Institute

[1966] 1 QB 569

Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 15:01 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Weller v Foot & Mouth Disease Research Institute

D was carrying out research on the foot and mouth virus which they leaked into surrounding farms so that  cattle in the area caught the virus and couldn’t be sold at auction by P, who would have been able to claim commission on each animal sold. Widgery J held that there was a duty to take reasonable care owed only to those persons whose person or property might foreseeably be injured by a failure to take such care, but not to P who had no proprietary interest in the property damaged. The only proprietary interest of P was in the market itself which would obviously not be damaged by the outbreak of the virus. 

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 >>