Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998]

Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] UKHL 17 holds significance in English tort law, company law, and contract law. The central issue revolved around the liability of a company director, Mr Mistlin, for alleged negligent advice provided in a brochure. The key takeaway from the judgment is the requirement of a direct or indirect assumption of responsibility by a director for the company to be held liable for negligent information.

Mr Williams and his partner sought a franchise from Natural Life Health Foods Ltd to open a health food shop. They relied on financial projections provided in a brochure. The venture failed, leading Mr. Williams to sue the company for alleged negligence. However, before the lawsuit concluded, the company went into liquidation. Mr Williams then sought to hold the managing director, Mr Mistlin, personally liable, claiming that Mr Mistlin had assumed responsibility for the advice given in the brochure.

The House of Lords unanimously held that Mr Williams' claim against Mr Mistlin would fail. The crucial factor was the absence of a separate assumption of responsibility directly to Mr Williams, coupled with a lack of requisite reliance on the information provided. The court emphasised the distinction between the company as a separate legal entity and its directors or agents.

Lord Steyn, delivering the judgment, clarified that the issue was not peculiar to companies but extended to any principal-agent relationship. The principle of assumption of responsibility requires a special relationship between the plaintiff and the tortfeasor. The court adopted an objective test, focusing on the actions or statements of the defendant in dealings with the plaintiff.

The court highlighted the importance of reliance in establishing the causative effect of assumption of responsibility. Mere reliance in fact was insufficient; it needed to be reasonable reliance on the assumption of personal responsibility. The court referred to Canadian cases to emphasise this point.

The judgment addressed academic criticism of the assumption of responsibility principle, noting its essential role in filling gaps in tort liability. Lord Steyn rejected the notion that the principle relied on a legal fiction. The practical application of the principle required evidence of an assumption of personal responsibility by the director and the necessary reliance.

In applying these principles to the case, the court found that Mr Mistlin's role in the company and the information provided in the brochure were insufficient to establish personal liability. There were no direct dealings, exchanges, or conduct that conveyed an assumption of responsibility to Mr Williams. The court also dismissed the alternative argument of Mr Mistlin being a joint tortfeasor.

This case reinforces the principle that for a director to be personally liable, there must be evidence of an assumption of responsibility and reasonable reliance by the plaintiff. The case underscores the distinction between the company as a legal entity and its directors, emphasising the need for a specific assumption of responsibility to hold individuals liable for negligent information provided by the company.
Back to blog
UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

Get ready for the SQE1 with high-performance SQE Study Guides developed by UOLLB and published by UOL Press to revolutionise your study method and exam strategy.

Turbocharge SQE Performance

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 essential case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding.
Speed up your revision with us now👇

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Council of Europe
Crown Prosecution Service
Baker Mckenzie 
Yale University
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University of London
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.