Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council [2004]

Facts

  • The National Environment Research Council carried out tests on Bangladeshi water supplies, and issued words to the effect that the water was safe to drink
  • The NERC had not checked for the presence of arsenic, and many, including the claimant were subsequently poisoned

Issue

  • Could the NERC be liable for not mentioning that there could be arsenic in the water

Decision

  • No liability

Reasoning

  • There was n relationship of proximity between the claimant, a citizen, and the NERC
  • Just because someone had knowledge does not automatically give them a duty to help solve other’s problems
RELATED CASE  Cookcroft v Smith [1705]

Posted in Tort Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 11th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy