Was Le Cocq responsible for selling alcohol to someone already drunk, even though he didn’t know about it?

Was Le Cocq responsible for selling alcohol to someone already drunk, even though he didn’t know about it?

In the case of Cundy v/s. Le Cocq, the court ruled that Le Cocq was indeed responsible for selling alcohol to someone who was already drunk, despite his lack of awareness of the buyer’s condition.

The judgment emphasized the principle that sellers have a duty of care towards their customers, especially when dealing with potentially harmful substances like alcohol. Even though Le Cocq did not knowingly sell alcohol to an intoxicated person, the court held him accountable. This decision was based on the understanding that sellers must take precautions to avoid contributing to any harm caused by the products they sell.

The court reasoned that in situations involving the sale of intoxicating substances, the seller should be vigilant and exercise caution. Ignorance of the buyer’s state of intoxication does not absolve the seller from their responsibility to ensure they do not contribute to harm.

Therefore, despite Le Cocq’s lack of knowledge about the buyer’s drunkenness, the court found him responsible for the consequences of selling alcohol to someone already inebriated. This decision established the principle that sellers are accountable for ensuring the responsible sale of potentially harmful goods, even when they might not be aware of the buyer’s condition at the time of sale.