Question

Principles:
(i) Neighbour principle — A person is liable if he harms his neighbour; a neighbour is one whose actions are foreseeably affected by the person.
(ii) One is liable only for contractual relations.
Facts:
X manufactures a food item and sells it to Y, a wholesaler. Y appoints Z, a retailer, to sell the items. Z sells the food to a consumer who, after eating it, falls ill. X is liable to the consumer because:

• A. of contractual relations
• B. of the Food Adulteration Act
• C. the consumer is the neighbor of X
• D. of the consumer protection law

Hint:

When principles are given, answer strictly within those principles; tort duty of care does not require contractual privity.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

The neighbour principle creates a duty of care in tort where harm to a foreseeable person is likely from one’s acts or omissions, even without a contract.
A manufacturer who places goods in the stream of commerce can foresee that the ultimate consumer may be harmed by negligent manufacture, so the consumer falls within the class of “neighbours.”
The second principle about liability only for contractual relations would negate tort duties, but the question asks why X is liable “because” of which ground among the options; only the neighbour principle matches the provided framework.
There is no direct contract between X and the consumer, so option (a) cannot justify liability.
Options (b) and (d) invoke statutes that are not part of the stated principles for this problem; we must decide strictly on the principles given, not external laws.
Therefore, liability flows from the neighbour principle: the consumer is X’s neighbour in law, making option (c) correct.