The neighbour principle
The neighbour principle holds that you owe a legal duty to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your “neighbour” — anyone so closely and directly affected by your act that you ought reasonably to have them in contemplation.
Last reviewed 14 June 2026
It was stated by Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, the case that founded the modern law of negligence. A manufacturer of ginger beer was held to owe a duty to the ultimate consumer even though there was no contract between them.
The principle answers the threshold question in any negligence claim: to whom is a duty of care owed? Its two ideas — reasonable foreseeability and a relationship of proximity — were later refined into the modern three-part test in Caparo Industries v Dickman.
Key cases
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562
- Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605
Frequently asked questions
Where does the neighbour principle come from?
Lord Atkin's speech in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, which established that a duty of care can exist outside any contractual relationship.
Is the neighbour principle still the test for a duty of care?
It is the foundation, but the modern test is the three-stage Caparo test (foreseeability, proximity, and whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty).