During a law degree – and subsequently your career – you’ll discover many legal cases, examine how they shaped the laws we know and discuss their influence on modern cases. Of course, some cases are more famous than others. Gather your peers and get ready to debate our selection of the most thought provoking legal cases every law student should know.
Written by Grant Longstaff. Published 23 December 2024.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1893)
The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company produced the ‘smoke ball’ which they claimed could prevent the user catching influenza. Though the smoke ball was a con, advertisements offered £100 to anyone who used the device and caught flu. Louisa Carlill used the device regularly for months and still caught the flu. Of course, when it came to claiming the £100 promised the company didn’t pay up.
Carlill sued the company for breaching the contract outlined in their advertisements. The judges found the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company advertisement constituted a binding contract with Carlill, despite the company arguing otherwise, and therefore they should pay the amount promised. The case has since become a defining moment in contract law and often referenced when considering legally binding agreements.
R v Dudley and Stephens (1884)
This case concerns four men adrift at sea in a lifeboat for over three weeks. They had limited supplies: only two tins of turnip and no water to drink. They managed to catch a sea turtle and eat the meat and resorted to drinking their own urine. But it wasn’t enough. When Richard Parker (a 17 year old cabin boy) fell ill, crew members Tom Dudley and Edwin Stephens decided to kill Parker, resorting to cannibalism to save their own lives.
After their rescue the men were charged with murder, with the court ruling that necessity is not a defence to murder. Whilst grim, the case is still a useful way to explore morality, necessity in criminal law and the ethical boundaries of both legal defences and the law.
McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris (1997)
This case, commonly known as the McLibel case, is the longest running libel case in English history and has even spawned a documentary. Helen Steel and David Morris distributed leaflets accusing fast food giant McDonald’s of mistreating their staff, animal cruelty, environmental harm and more. In 1990 the corporation brought libel charges against the pair. Steel and Morris were denied legal aid, policy for libel cases at the time, though they did get significant pro bono support, including from current prime minister Kier Starmer.
Mr Justice Rodger Bell presided over the case without a jury, ruling Steel and Morris had indeed libelled McDonald’s and ordered them to pay damages. The pair never paid, and McDonald’s never pursued the money.
In 2005 The European Court of Human Rights criticised the lack of legal aid offered to Steel and Morris in the original case, ruling the pair had been denied the right to a fair trial and freedom of expression. Now, the case is often used to discuss defamation, corporate law and access to justice.
Donoghue v Stephenson (1932)
May Donoghue had enjoyed an ice cream and ginger beer float and set about finishing the remaining drink left in the bottle. However, when she poured out the remainder a decomposing snail plopped into her glass. Donoghue became ill after the incident and went on to sue the ginger beer manufacturer David Stephenson.
The House of Lords decision in this case established the principle of ‘duty of care’ and Lord Atkin’s ‘neighbour principle’, which identifies a ‘neighbour’ in law as anyone who could be affected by your actions. This judgment created a general duty of care, which has evolved to cover areas such as medical malpractice, economic loss and product liability.
Re A (Conjoined Twins) (2001)
The case involved twins Rosie and Gracie, who were conjoined at the lower abdomen and shared vital organs and doctors concluded if the twins weren’t surgically separated both would die. Gracie was the stronger of the twins; Rosie depended on her sister’s organs to survive.
Whilst their parents objected to the proposed separation, the hospital sought legal permission to perform the operation. They argued saving Gracie outweighed the moral concerns surrounding Rosie’s death. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of performing the operation, with the judges presenting a variety of arguments and legal reasoning to support their decision. The twins were separated, with Gracie surviving and Rosie unfortunately passing away. The ethical and legal dilemmas thrown up by this case are still discussed today.
No matter which legal cases you choose to research each will provide an opportunity to expand your legal knowledge, deepen critical thinking skills and enhance your reasoning. There are many more cases which you’ll explore throughout your studies which have changed the legal landscape and shaped the laws which govern us today, but we hope this small selection whets your appetite for more.
Are you interested in studying law? Explore our full range of undergraduate law degrees and enrol today.
