Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
What type of liability is it?
Strict Liability
What does strict liability mean?
Defendant may be liable without being negligent.
Case details?
Constructed reservoir
above disused mine shaft
Spread to neighbouring mine owned by claimant
Causing extensive damage
What are the requirements for an action in Rylands v Fletcher: (5)
Accumulation on the defendant's land A thing likely to do mischief if it escapes Escape Non-natural use of land The damage must not be too remote.
Accumulation requirements 1
Defendant must bring hazardous thing onto land and keep it there - Giles v Walker
Accumulation requirements 2
The thing must be accumulated for the defendants own purposes - Dunne v North West Gas Board
Accumulation requirements 3
The thing that escapes need not be the thing accumulated - Miles v Forest Rock Granite
Does the thing need to be inherently dangerous?
No, need only be a thing likely to cause damage if it escapes. - Hillier v Air Ministry - Electricity.
Can you claim for personal injury?
No, Lord Hoffmann stated that it is ‘a tort against land’ which means ‘damages for personal injuries are not recoverable’
Escape.
Must be an escape from defendants land. Read v Lyons
Will an injury from accumulation only invoke liability?
No, must escape.
What does Non-natural use of land mean?
it means the use must be ‘extraordinary and unusual’
Can a use be extraordinary in one place but not in another?
yes. TransCo v Stockport
What is the key case for remoteness of damage?
Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather
Is there liability for pure economic loss?
No - Weller v Foot and Mouth Disease Research Institute
What is the case for the rules of remoteness?
Wagon Mound
Wagon Mound
Fire destroyed boats
The type of damage must be foreseeable, not the extent of the damage.
Weller v Foot and Mouth Disease Research Institiute
Virus escaped, affecting cattle making them unsaleable
No liability of pure economic loss
Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather
Spillages caused borehole to stop being used.
Wasn’t reasonably foreseeable that it would cause the closing of borehole
TransCo v Stockport
Water pipes leaked and damaged gas supply.
Was not un-natural use of land.
Read v Lyons
Explosion killed man. No negligence.
No escape
Hillier v Air Ministry
Electricity cables caused cows to be electrocuted.
Was liable as it was non-natural use of land - although potentially natural nowadays.
Miles v Forest Rock Granite
Blasting rocks, flew onto highway and injured.
Accumulation- Explosives accumulated
Dunne v North West Gas Board
Gas escaped due to water main, ignited along a sewer and caused injury. Was not accumulated for Gas Boards own purposes
