Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd

<a href="/facts/In_Re/LKKxpV2m">In Re</a> Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd (1921) is an <a href="/facts/English_law/FqYSDmGK">English</a> <a href="/facts/Tort/nUgUN8zN">tort</a> case on <a href="/facts/Causation_in_English_law/1frh5QDV">causation</a> and <a href="/facts/Remoteness_(law)/1QskqNvV">remoteness</a> in the law of <a href="/facts/Negligence/0GMNBaIr">negligence</a>.
The <a href="/facts/Court_of_Appeal_of_England_and_Wales/0uWNLJI9">Court of Appeal</a> held that a <a href="/facts/Defendant/t7ftlHvP">defendant</a> can be deemed liable for all consequences flowing from his negligent conduct regardless of how unforeseeable such consequences are. The case is an example of <a href="/facts/Strict_liability/6aeC9IDb">strict liability</a>, a concept which has generally fallen out of favour with the <a href="/facts/Common_law/vGVcW4Kf">common law</a> courts. The case may now be considered "bad law", having been superseded by the landmark decisions of <a href="/facts/Donoghue_v_Stevenson/QufMozNe">Donoghue v Stevenson</a> and <a href="/facts/Overseas_Tankship_(UK)_Ltd_v_Morts_Dock_and_Engineering_Co_Ltd/kMeC6Bpq">The Wagon Mound (No 1)</a>.

Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd open-in-new

Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd