Oes the spirit of Donoghue v. Stevenson still survive after Caparo Industries plc v Dickman?(law essay)

 The emphasis [in Caparo] remains upon the conduct of the defendant.
Loss caused by his fault is still the basis of liability; under Anns, he was
liable unless there was a reason why he should not be; now, he is not liable
unless there is a reason why he should be. (Lord Hoffmann) then discuss about Does the spirit of Donoghue v. Stevenson still survive after Caparo Industries plc v Dickman?

You re asked whether the spirit of Donoghue v. Stevenson survives
after Caparo. To do this, you will need to understand not just what
these two cases say, but also how they have been applied in
successive cases. Please do not, however, feel that you have to
discuss every single preand post-Caparo case on the duty of care 
you definitely do not need to go that far. Rather, we expect you to
be able to build up and illustrate your arguments with reference to a
few, carefully selected leading cases.

You are also asked to consider the views set out in three articles.
This is an academic task, and it is therefore important that your
response be written at an appropriate academic level and, more
importantly, engage with the existing academic literature. The three
articles  which, as you will see, were written at rather different
points of time  should serve as a starting point in your exploration of
academic perspectives relevant to the task set for you. You obviously
don t have to confine yourself to these articles  references to the
views contained in textbooks and other academic works are also

As the question suggests, you will need to describe and explain your
own views, and not confine yourself to what the cases or academic
commentators say. You should support your views with reference to
cases and / or the views of academic commentators, but you should
also feel free to disagree with them, as long as you can explain why
in a clear and persuasive way.
articles:” Heuston,  Donoghue v Stevenson in Retrospect (1957) 20 MLR 1
” Kidner,  Resiling from the Anns Principle (1987) 7 Legal Studies 319
” Winfield,  Duty in Tortious Negligence (1934) 34 Col LR 41