Chapter 44- Rylands v Fletcher

Question 1

State the facts of Ryland v Fletcher

Answer 1

• A mill owner had paid independent contractors to make a reservoir on his land which was intended to supply water to the mill.
• While building it, the contractors came across an old mine and joined some of the passages with the mine on the claimant’s neighboring land. They instead could have blocked up the shafts
• When the reservoir was filled, the water burst through the shafts and flooded the claimant’s land.
• The defendant was not negligent as he did not know about the shafts and he could not be vicariously liable as the contractors were not employees.

Question 2

To succeed in tort the claimant must show the following:

Answer 2

1- The defendant must control the land from which the mischief has come
2- The defendant must have had some non-natural use of the land
3- The thing accumulated must be likely to do damage when it escapes
4- The dangerous thing must escape
5- There must be damage because of the escape

Question 3

Who can sue

Answer 3

• An owner
• Interested in becoming an owner

Question 4

Who can be sued

Answer 4

• whoever is in control of the dangerous thing

Question 5

List the defences

Answer 5

• Volenti
• Contributory negligence
• Statutory authority
• Act of a stranger
• Act of God

Question 6

VOLENTI:

Answer 6

Implied or expressed consent to the dangerous thing being on the claimants land is a defence

Question 7

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE:

Answer 7

• This is where the claimant contributes to causing the escape of the dangerous thing.
• Default of the claimant occurs when the escape is completely the fault of the claimant or the damage caused is because of the unusual sensitivity on the claimants land

Question 8

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

Answer 8

• Defendants can escape liability if the current statute authorises their actions

Question 9

ACT OF A STRANGER

Answer 9

A defendant wont be liable where the damage is done by a third party

Question 10

ACT OF GOD

Answer 10

• The defence is available when the escape is a result of natural forces that were unforeseeable

Question 11

State 2 similarities between Nuisance and RvF

Answer 11

• They both require some Unreasonable use of land
• ## In many cases, claimants will succeed equally well under both torts

Question 12

State 3 differences between nuisance and RvF

Answer 12

• Rylands is used in a much more restrictive way because of the specific requirements of accumulation and danger
• Ryland is more concerned with one-off incidents while nuisance has to have a longer duration
• Rylands is more concerned with escape rather than interference
• Nuisance does not require proof of ‘non-natural use’ or ‘escape’ making it more claimant-friendly

Question 13

Evaluate R v F

Answer 13

• The defendant must introduce the dangerous thing and it must be unnatural accumulation which limits the scope of claims this is because:
  > Courts have been inconsistent in defining what constitutes to a ‘dangerous’ thing
  > What is ‘non-natural’ is subjective and changes overtime
• Proving the event was unforeeseable can be difficult
• The defences make it easier for defendants to escape liability reducing the effectiveness of the tort.
• Strict liability is a harsh principle so restrictions can prevent floodgates of cases.