CaseSnappy makes learning the law simple. Our AI-powered tool breaks down complex cases into summaries of the facts, issues, decision and key passages.
Save precious time, boost your understanding and focus on the analysis - not the boring stuff.
CaseSnappy’s summaries are concise but they still provide me with all of the info I need. It’s a game-changer as a student - for cases and concepts.
I am quite literally 5 minutes into your website and I am astonished at how useful this is?! I’m having a blast at the moment searching random cases I know.
The difference between CaseSnappy and other legal research sites is clear. It’s the ideal tool for class preparation and essay writing.
I used CaseSnappy to support me in my summatives. It has been so useful, and a dream for law students.
CaseSnappy was very helpful in not only summarising cases well, but also in recommending similar cases which I added into my work.
So helpful when verifying the usefulness of cases when researching before committing to reading the whole judgment. It saves so much time.
This is a fantastic tool for law students to utilise. It's incredibly easy to use and allows for you to complete work in a more efficient & tidy manner.
I love how precise the summaries are, perfect for when you're in a rush to get to know multiple cases.
This website was a lifesaver for me over Christmas whilst completing assignments and it is something I shall definitely be sharing with my friends.
The summaries are accurate and full of important points. There's nothing more boring than reading a whole judgment just to find the small bit of info you need!
I love using CaseSnappy! It’s great to get a good understanding of case law with only a small amount of reading.
A great resource for university students to supplement their understanding on cases. CaseSnappy has proven especially useful for contract law and for wider reading.
A very easy to use and informative website to research all your cases! Has been a great tool during my time at uni and has been utilised by so many of my classmates.
The platform has been really helpful especially for (the mundane) company law - thank you so much.
A very helpful tool for law students, simplifies case law for them to understand easily. I recommend it to every law student.
Legal research from the future🚀
Traditional legal research sites are stuck in the past. We give you snappy insights - leaving more time for the higher value, in depth research.
Choose between our web app database, curated for law students by a law students, or our cutting-edge browser extension, enabling you to summarize the latest cases in real time.
Preferred over ChatGPT 77% of the time📈
Students love our guaranteed accuracy, legal-specific optimisations and clear summary structure. Read the report here.
Beyond just summaries, we offer:
• Explanations of key legal concepts
• Further reading suggestions
• Quick access to full judgments
• Aggregated analytics for universities
Focussed on accessibility and AI literacy✅
CaseSnappy was designed with the recommendations of the British Dyslexia Association in mind. We eliminate long, dense paragraphs and give you simple, clear language in bullet points.
We're also all about responsible AI use. Check out our free online course on the Open University's OpenLearn platform here.
From the landmark snail-in-the-bottle tort law case of Donoghue v Stevenson to the tricky criminal law concept of actus reus, we've got it all. Check out some examples of CaseSnappy's powerful summarisation abilities below, and discover how you can supercharge your legal research.
Keywords: tort law, negligence, duty of care, neighbour principle
Facts
• In 1928, Mrs. Donoghue (the claimant) went to a café with a friend who bought her a ginger beer in an opaque bottle.
• After drinking some of the beer, she discovered a decomposing snail in the bottle, which made her ill.
• She sued Mr. Stevenson (the defendant), the manufacturer, for damages.
Issues
• The main issue was whether the manufacturer of a product owed a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of the product.
• The claimant argued that the manufacturer was liable for the harm caused by the defective product, while the defendant argued that he had no duty to the claimant as she had not purchased the product from him.
• Because there was no contract between Donoghue and either the manufacturer or the seller of the product, she had no remedy under contract law and instead had to rely on the law of negligence.
Decision
• The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed a duty of care to the ultimate consumer.
• Lord Atkin formulated the 'neighbour test' which provides that a person owes a duty of care to his neighbour, meaning those who are so closely and directly affected by his act that he ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when he is directing his mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.
• Applying this test, Lord Atkin found that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the consumer of his products.
Key passages
• '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.' (Lord Atkin)
• 'The grounds of action may be as various and manifold as human errancy and the conception of legal responsibility may develop in adaptation to altering social conditions and standards. The criterion of judgment must adjust and adapt itself to the changing circumstances of life. The categories of negligence are never closed.' (Lord Macmillan)
Related cases
• Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728
• Barrett v Enfield LBC [2001] 2 AC 550, [1999] 3 WLR 79
• Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605
What is actus reus?
• Actus reus (Latin for 'guilty act') refers to the physical element of a criminal offence. In English law, it constitutes the wrongful act or omission that comprises the external elements of the crime.
• The actus reus must be a voluntary act, and it must be a causing or contributing factor to the criminal harm defined by the offence.
Why is it important?
• The concept is important because it serves as the foundation for determining criminal liability. It helps to distinguish between wrongful conduct and mere thoughts or intentions which alone are insufficient for prosecution.
• Establishing the actus reus ensures that the defendant is legally responsible for the criminal act, rather than just the harmful consequences.
• Without actus reus, a defendant cannot be found guilty of a criminal offence. It must be proven, along with the mental element (mens rea), to satisfy the requirements of a crime.
Example cases
• R v White [1910] 2 KB 124 - Relevance: It demonstrates that actus reus and mens rea must coincide. The defendant placed poison in his mother's drink intending to kill her, but she died of a heart attack before consuming the poison. The defendant was acquitted of murder.
• R v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161 - Relevance: The case involved an act of omission and a continuing act. The defendant’s act of failing to extinguish a fire that he inadvertently started was considered an actus reus. The court held that his omission to act created a duty and breach of that duty constituted actus reus.
.jpg)
