rylands v fletcher

Question 1

r v f definition

Answer 1

Where a person’s property is damaged or destroyed by the escape of non-naturally stored material onto adjoining property

Question 2

r v f parties

Answer 2

C – must have an interest in the land – owner or tenant

D – Read v Lyons – D must be the owner or occupier and have some control over the land

Question 3

1. Bringing onto the land and an accumulation

Answer 3

Must be a substance that is not naturally present on the land

Giles v Walker – no liability if substance is naturally present (weeds)

Ellison v Ministry of Defence – no liability for a substance that naturally accumulates (rainwater)

D must BRING substance onto land and ACCUMULATE

Question 4

2. Of a thing likely to cause mischief if it escapes

Answer 4

Test of foreseeability

Not the escape that must be foreseeable but some sort of mischief (i.e damage) IF it escapes

E.g. gas, electricity, poisonous fumes
If gas escapes it is foreseeable that it would cause mischief

Question 5

3. Which amounts to a non-natural use of the land

Answer 5

Rylands v Fletcher – must be a non-natural use of the land

Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council – must be an extraordinary and unusual use of the land – not storage of things associated with domestic use of land even if potentially hazardous

Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather plc. – amount of thing stored will be relevant – if vast quantities, more likely to be non-natural
Will change depending on technological and lifestyle changes over time e.g. petrol in car natural now but not in early 1900s

Question 6

4. Which escapes

Answer 6

Read v Lyons - Must escape from one property to an adjoining property (no liability when a munitions expert was injured from an exploding shell while inspecting the factory)

Fire:
LMS International Ltd v Styrene Packaging and Insulation Ltd – fire started in D’s factory containing flammable material and spread to C’s adjoining property – had accumulated materials which were a known fire risk – D liable
BUT Stannard v Gore – claim not usually allowed for fire as the thing brought onto the land must escape, not the fire started by the thing

Question 7

5. And causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property

Answer 7

Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather plc. – damage to adjoining property must be reasonably foreseeable and not too remote

Specific causation question – is the ACTUAL damage caused reasonably foreseeable?

Question 8

6. Strict Liability

Answer 8

No fault tort – the reason for or how the escape occurred does not need to be proved – only needs to be shown that the substance did escape

Even if the escape is not D’s fault, he can still be liable

Even if D is careful, this is not a defence

BUT - Unlike other strict liability torts though, defences are available

Balance strict liability with any possible defence (e.g. act of God)

Question 9

defences

Answer 9

Act of Stranger – Perry v Kendricks Transport Ltd. – if a stranger over whom D has no control is the cause of the escape D may not be liable

Act of God – Nichols v Marsland – extreme weather conditions that “no human foresight can provide against” – D may not be liable

Consent – if C has consented to the thing being accumulated by D

Contributory Negligence – where C is partly responsible for the escape

Statutory Authority – if an Act of Parliament authorises D’s actions

Question 10

remedies

Answer 10

Damages – C must show damage to or destruction of property – damages for cost of repair or replacement of property
Can’t claim for personal injury

Question 11

rylands v fletcher essay steps

Answer 11

• definition
• Bringing onto the land and an accumulation
• Of a thing likely to cause mischief if it escapes
• Which amounts to a non-natural use of the land
• Which escapes from one property to an adjoining
  property
• And causes reasonably foreseeable damage to
  adjoining property
• Strict Liability
• defences
• remedies

Question 12

rvf step 1 cases

bringing onto the land an accumulation

Answer 12

giles v walker

ellison v ministry of defence

Question 13

rvf step 3 cases

which amounts to a non natural use of the land

Answer 13

rylands v fletcher
transco plc v stockport metropolitan borough council
cambridge water co v eastern counties leather plc

Question 14

rvf step 4 cases

which escapes

Answer 14

read v lyons

Question 15

rvf step 5 cases

and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property

Answer 15

cambridge water co v eastern counties leather plc