, ▁where ▁the ▁establishment ▁of ▁a ▁duty ▁must ▁be ▁bal anced ▁against ▁applicable ▁policy ▁matters . ▁ ▁Compar ative ▁law ▁The ▁judgment ▁and ▁reasoning ▁of ▁Lord ▁At kin ▁in ▁Don og h ue ▁v ▁Stevens on ▁is ▁very ▁similar ▁to ▁the ▁judgment ▁and ▁reasoning ▁applied ▁by ▁Card oz o ▁C J ▁in ▁the ▁American ▁case ▁of ▁P als g raf ▁v . ▁Long ▁Island ▁Rail road ▁Co ., ▁ 2 4 8 ▁N . Y . ▁ 3 3 9 , ▁ 1 6 2 ▁N . E . ▁ 9 9 ▁( 1 9 2 8 ) ▁four ▁years ▁earlier . ▁ ▁Although ▁the ▁similarity ▁in ▁approach ▁has ▁been ▁noted ▁by ▁comment ators , ▁the ▁decision ▁is ▁ ▁P als g raf ▁was ▁not ▁c ited ▁in ▁either ▁argument ▁or ▁in ▁the ▁jud g ments ▁in ▁Don og h ue , ▁although ▁Lord ▁At kin ▁did ▁refer ▁to ▁an ▁earlier ▁decision ▁of ▁Card oz o ▁J : ▁Mac Ph erson ▁v . ▁Bu ick ▁Motor ▁Co ., ▁ 2 1 7 ▁N . Y . ▁ 3 8 2 , ▁ 1 1 1 ▁N . E . ▁ 1 0 5 0 ▁( 1 9 1 6 ). ▁ ▁As ▁a ▁met ap hor ▁Today ▁the ▁far ▁reaching ▁changes ▁of ▁the ▁decision ▁for ▁the ▁law ▁of ▁tort s ▁is ▁sufficiently ▁well ▁recogn ised ▁that ▁the ▁case ' s ▁name ▁is ▁used ▁as ▁a ▁met ap hor . ▁ ▁For ▁example , ▁Bar cl ays ▁Bank ▁v ▁W ▁J ▁Sim ms ▁[