neighbour becomes, in law, you must not injure your neighbour; and the lawyers' question, Who is my neighbour? receives a restricted reply. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be- persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question". Our discussions on the Tort of Negligence will revolve around principles flowing from Lord Atkin's formulation of the Tort of Negligence. The formulation provides a formula for determining Duty of Care arising out of certain relationships. It is a formulation that is expected to be flexible enough to also cover ever-changing social and economic circumstances. Lord Atkin also suggests that the elements making up the Tort of Negligence are to be found in Common Law. (A) Existence of Negligence before House of Lord's Decision in 1932 When Winfield wrote his article on "The History of Negligence in Torts", (1926) 42 Law Quarterly Review 184 , several years before the decision in DONOGHUE v. STEVENSON was handed down, he was able to support his thesis that
106 negligence existed as an independent tort by reference to a list of cases going back to ALSTON V. HEAVEN decided in 1797, (2 Esp. 533 at 535) . Winfield contends that:
