It was held by the Full Court that it was doubtful whether the common law still recognised a distinction between liability for things which were dangerous in themselves, and things which were not. In any event the Court held the lawn-mower was not dangerous per se. The manufacturer's duty was to design and construct the mower with the degree of care appropriate to the dangers attendant upon its use as to minimise the risk of injury, and to warn prospective users of its dangerous propensity. Accordingly, the trial Judge was correct in not directing the jury that the duty of care imposed on the manufacturer was tantamount to strict liability.