## Facts

- Coggs owned several casks of brandy stored in a cellar in Holborn, London.
- Bernard agreed, without payment, to move the brandy about half a mile to another cellar near the Strand.
- While unloading at the destination cellar, one cask was damaged and about 150 gallons of brandy were lost.
- Coggs sued Bernard in an action on the case, alleging Bernard undertook the carriage but caused the loss through negligence.
- Coggs obtained judgment at trial; Bernard challenged liability on the ground that he was not a common carrier and received no reward.

## Issues

1. Whether a person who gratuitously undertakes to carry another’s goods is liable for damage caused by negligent performance despite the absence of contractual consideration.
2. What duty of care a gratuitous bailee for carriage owes within the law of bailment.

## Decision

- The Court of King’s Bench affirmed judgment for Coggs.
- The court held that one who undertakes to perform an act for another, even without reward, is liable for harm caused by negligent performance.
- Bernard, having accepted custody and undertaken the carriage, owed a duty of reasonable care and was liable for the resulting loss.

## Legal Principles

- A voluntary undertaking can create a tort duty to exercise reasonable care once the actor accepts custody or control and begins performance.
- In a gratuitous bailment for carriage (a bailment for the bailor’s benefit), the bailee is not an insurer but is liable upon proof of negligence.
- Bailment duties vary by type of bailment; common carriers may face stricter responsibility, while other bailees are generally liable on a fault basis.
- Entrustment and acceptance of goods can supply the basis for a duty of “careful management” even when there is no payment.

## Conclusion

The court held that Bernard’s gratuitous undertaking to transport Coggs’s brandy imposed a duty of reasonable care, and his negligent handling made him liable for the loss, establishing that liability can arise in tort from an accepted undertaking without consideration and organizing bailment duties by category.


Coggs v. Bernard, 92 Eng. Rep. 107 (K.B. 1703)