NEGLIGENCE- rylands v fletcher Flashcards
intro def for rylands v fletcher?
a person who brings on his lands …anything likely to do mischief of it escapes . will be answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence. - blackburn j
what does creating a tort like this show?
judiciary are creative
allowed c to sue for damages that d did on his land
balancing conflicted interests
what can you break the quote down into?
3 parts
whats 1st part?
d brought something onto his land e.g swimming,something new to land
example for d brought something onto his land?
rocks and soil occur naturally on land so no liability if they escape
case for d brought something onto his land?
pontardawe rdc v moore -gwyn
what did d in ryland do?
brought water onto the land. no limit as to what can be brought on.
whats the 2nd element?
that d made a non natural use of his land
what does that d made a non natural use of his land mean?
i.e beyond ordinary use or degree of abnormality
case for that d made a non natural use of his land?
mason v levy auto parts- old tyres stored fire spread to neighbouring property = liable as non natural use of land
what happens if on own land?
selfish but ok but if on someone else = liable
what should u see that d made a non natural use of his land as?
reasonableness test -if thing brought to land reasonable and useful to have then it will not be non natural use (transco plc v stockport)
what is the 3rd element ?
the thing was something likely to do mischief if it escapes
what should you see 3rd element as?
foreseeability test- the thing brought must be foreseeable source of ahrm and therefore not harmless so it must have some sort of hazard/danger attached to it- reasonable test
case for the thing was something likely to do mischief if it escapes ?
shiffman v st john of jersulam hospital= liable
what is the 4th element?
there must be an actual escape of dangerous substance from d’s land
case for an actual escape?
read v lyons
crowhurst v amersham burial board-yes
ponting v noakes-no
what is generally not liable in rylands?
p.i only 1 leading case- hale v jennings
what is general damage in rylands?
damage to land, property , p.i and economic loss not available
defences for rylands?
consent common benefit act of stranger stat auth act of god fault of c
1 what is meant by consent?
if c consented to source of danger they are consented to risk of it. especially if see potential hazard
2 what is meant by common benefit?
if source of danger maintained for benefit of both c and d ,the d will not be liable for its escape. the defence is either related to the defence of consent or same thing
3 what is meant by act of stranger?
the d will not be liable if stranger responsible for escape- rickards v lothian
4 what is meant by stat auth?
e.g resorvior bought by council -
5 what is meant by act of god?
causation - nichols v marsland
6 what is meant by fault of c?
alternatively could contribute
which are causation principles?
3,5,6
what does rylands v fletcher have to also be
degree of blameworthiness (transco v stockport mbc)
what is the only reason why rylands v fletch not strict lia?
forseeability
