This is not England Series Article 2: Following the Australia Knitting Mills case, wouldn't it be a tortious offence to produce milk or drinking water or bread that forestalls hair growth, that cuts the hair and the scalp without the consent of the customer? In fact, it's an assault on the buying public. It's an unlawful assault on an other contrary to the King's peace; with intent. The "Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills" case is a landmark legal decision in product liability and negligence law. It established that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers to ensure their products are safe for intended use, even if the product is sold through a retailer. The case involved a man who developed dermatitis from wearing underwear containing excess sulphites, and the court found the manufacturer liable for negligence.

 

This is not England Series Article 2:

Following the Australia Knitting Mills case, wouldn't it be a tortious offence to produce milk or drinking water or bread that forestalls hair growth, that cuts the hair and the scalp without the consent of  the customer? In fact, it's an assault on the buying public. It's an unlawful assault  on an other contrary to the King's peace; with intent. 

The "Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills" case is a landmark legal decision in product liability and negligence law. It established that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers to ensure their products are safe for intended use, even if the product is sold through a retailer. The case involved a man who developed dermatitis from wearing underwear containing excess sulphites, and the court found the manufacturer liable for negligence.