#Exam 2(2)- Rylands V fletcher Flashcards
Definition of Rvf
Must have brought or accumulated something which is unnatural use of land
What is a main difference with nuisance and Rylands
The tort need not be foreseeable in rylands
What are the 4 elements of Rylands
Accumulation or storage
Mischief if it escapes
Non natural use of land
Reasonably foreseeable for escape to cause damage
what must a claimant have?
must have proprietary interest
what must defendants be
must be owner or occupier of land where the item has been accumulated
when may someone not be liable for something on their land
if It is naturally occurring
what must be shown if the item would escape
that it would cause damage if it escapes
what does Hale v Jennings show
occupied chair o plane ride could be covered a it would obviously cause danger when escaping
what does LMS International ltd v styrene packaging and insulation show ?
Defendant was still liable because they had accumulated products which were known to be highly flammable
Stannard v Gore
not guilty because the tyres themselves had not escaped and also they were not particularly dangerous for an industrial estate
how has non natural use of land changed over time
it has been further developed to account for technological advances
what must be looked at when seeing whether something is non natural
the area and whether it would be typical to find that thing there
what does Rickards v Lothian
that flooding from a tap is not a non natural use of land
what does British Celanese v A H Hunt LTD show
metal foil which was stored was classed as natural because it provided a benefit to the local population
what must the item must importantly do
escape from one property to another
what happened in Read v Lyons
munitions blew up and people were injured- not guilty because no escape
what happened in Cambridge Water co v Eastern Counties Leather
when chemicals spilled it was held that the damage was far too remote for the claim to work
what are the defences used in Rvf
volenti non fit injuria (consent) act of a stranger act of god statutory authority contributory negligence
what defence does Perry v Kendricks Transport show
act of a stranger- a person removed the petrol cap which then lead to the fire
what defence does Nichols v Marsland show
Act of god- freak thunderstorms cause dam to break and damages bridge
what remedies can you get in Rvf
cost of damage to rebuild the property
Strengths and Weaknesses from RvF
X-strict liability but the defences render this useless
X-easy to prove that it is a natural use of land
X-other acts have rendered Rvf useless
X- no PI
