Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
What is the principle from the case of Rylands v Fletcher?
When D has accumulated something dangerous on his land, which escapes and causes damage to neighbouring land.
What are the 5 elements of Rylands v Fletcher?
- D must bring or accumulate something onto their land.
- That thing must be likely to cause mischief if it escapes.
- Bringing or accumulating the thing must be a non-natural use of land.
- The thing must actually escape and cause reasonably foreseeable damage.
- C can sue D.
What did the case of Read v Lyons say?
D must actually be the owner of their land.
What must D be for the 1st element to be made out?
The owner/occupier of the land (Read v Lyons) and have control over their land.
What is the principle from Smith v Scott?
Where the owner has let (rented) the land to other, the tenants have control of that land.
What is the principle from Ellison v Ministry of Defence?
Where the thing causing damage is natural, it cannot be said D brought it onto the land.
What does the 2nd element mean?
One could foresee damage once the thing has escaped. NOT how foreseeable the escape is.
What happened in Hale v Jennings?
A chair came loose from a fair ride and injured C. This is an example of damage being foreseeable once the escape has occurred, not how foreseeable the escape is.
What is the case when dealing with fire damage?
Stannard v Gore - Where fire escapes and causes damage, D must have brought that fire onto the land, not just objects that start or worsen the fire. I.e. D must bring the fire directly, not the objects to start a fire.
What did Rickards v Lothian define non-natural use of land as?
Some special use bringing with it increased danger to others - not ordinary use of the land nor one that is of general benefit to the community.
What is the case of British Celanese v A H Hunt Ltd an example of?
A use of land that has extra risk but has a general benefit to the community so isn’t non-natural use.
What did Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather say?
Even of there is a general benefit to the community, if the use of land is very dangerous, the use of land can still be non-natural.
What is the essay structure for the 3rd element?
- Always explain Rickards v Lothian and Cambridge Water Co. (Use British Celanese when appropriate)
When Applying answer:
1. Is D using the land for ordinary purposes
2. Is D’s use giving a public benefit
3. Is the use very dangerous
What are the cases for the 4th element?
Read v Lyons - ‘Escape’ means the thing goes in a place where D does not have control.
Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Countries Leather - Damage must not be too remote.
Who can sue?
Anyone with proprietary interest in the land - Transco v Stockport MBC
e.g. children cannot sue
