## Facts

- Peter Yachuk, a nine-year-old boy, suffered severe burns after buying gasoline from the defendant, Oliver Blais Co Ltd, a fuel supplier.
- Peter falsely stated that the gasoline was for his mother’s car, and the defendant’s employee sold it to him without verifying the purpose.
- Peter and his friend used the gasoline to start a fire, resulting in an explosion that caused significant injuries to Peter.
- Peter’s parents sued the defendant for negligence, claiming the company owed a duty of care not to sell gasoline to children due to its dangerous nature.
- The defendant argued that Peter was contributorily negligent by misrepresenting the purpose for the gasoline and by using it recklessly.

## Issues

1. Whether the defendant owed a duty of care to prevent the sale of gasoline to a child.
2. Whether Peter’s contributory negligence should reduce or eliminate his claim for damages.
3. What standard of care applies when assessing a child's contributory negligence.

## Decision

- The House of Lords held that the defendant owed a duty of care to prevent the sale of gasoline to children, given the foreseeable risk of harm.
- The court found the defendant had breached this duty by failing to verify Peter’s claim about the gasoline’s use.
- The court concluded that Peter’s contributory negligence should be assessed by a standard proportionate to his age and maturity, not as that of an adult.
- Peter’s damages were reduced by 25% to account for his contributory negligence, rather than barring his claim entirely.

## Legal Principles

- The standard of care for contributory negligence must be proportionate to a child's age, intelligence, and experience.
- Children cannot be held to the same standard of care as adults, given their limited capacity to understand and avoid risks.
- Foreseeability of harm and duty of care are central in negligence claims involving minors, especially with dangerous substances.
- Contributory negligence does not bar a child’s claim outright but may justify a reduction in damages.

## Conclusion

The decision in Yachuk v Oliver Blais Co Ltd established that a child's contributory negligence must be measured by their age and maturity, ensuring a balanced and equitable approach to duty of care and liability in negligence claims involving minors.


Yachuk v Oliver Blais Co Ltd [1949] AC 386