from rural-based production to industrially based activities. It was the case of DONOGHUE V. STEVENSON [1932] AC 562 which finally and clearly spelt the existence of a distinct Tort of Negligence. Freed from the shackles of "privity of contract" by DONOGHUE V. STEVENSON [1932] AC 562 (HL), and operating in a society where injuries frequently are caused by carelessness and only rarely by deliberate acts of wrongdoing, negligence claims account for the vast majority of tort action: [KLAR, Lewis N., Tort Law, Thomson Professional Publishing Canada, 1991]. Today the cause of action in negligence dominates the law of torts, both in terms of number of claims, and theoretical importance. Unlike other torts which protect certain well-defined interests from equally well-defined invasions, the action in negligence, at least as it is generally interpreted and applied, has relatively few rigid impediments to continued expansion. Development and expansion of the Tort of Negligence to cover new factual situations and problems has been phenomenal. Tort of Negligence has proven to be most dynamic and prolific. Negligence has expanded to cover more scenarios today than in 1932: ".. the invention of the Reasonable Man, probably the outstanding feature of the common law, has kept the law of torts, particularly the tort of negligence, an open ended concept. This makes the tort of negligence responsive to developing and changing situations.." [HUARAKA, T., page
104 135] It is important to observe that though the Tort of Negligence officially came into
