Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
what is Rylands v Fletcher?
where a person’s property is damaged or destroyed by the escape of non-naturally stored material onto adjoining property
what did the HoL establish in Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather?
identified this tort as a type of nuisance and subject to the same test of foreseeability
what are the 4 elements that must be proved?
- the bringing onto the land and an accumulation (or storage)
- of a thing likely to cause mischief if it escapes
- which amounts to a non-natural use of the land and
- which does escape and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property
Rylands v Fletcher
all elements present and D liable. bringing water on land and storage of water, large volume which could damage if it escapes. it’s a non-natural use of land. water escaped and caused damage
potential D?
Viscount Simon’s test in Read v Lyons, D will be owner or occupier of land who satisfies elements, D must have some control over land where material is stored
bringing onto land?
there must be a bringing onto the land of a substance,
if material is naturally present on land, can there be liability?
if naturally present, then no liability Giles v Walker (1890)
weeds spread to neighboring land
can there be liability for something that naturally accumulates on land?
no, Ellison v Ministry of Defence
rainwater that accumulated naturally
the thing is likely to do mischief if it escapes?
the thing D brings onto land must be likely to cause damage if it escapes, this is test of foreseeability (not the escape that has to be foreseeable but the damage )
examples of things likely to cause mischeif?
- gas, electricity
- poisonous fumes
- flag pole
- chair from chair-o-plane (Hale v Jennings Bros)
damage by fire?
Ltd v Styrene Packaging and instulation
accumulated things that were known fire risks
Wyvern
damage by fire claims are rare as it is ‘thing’ that has to escape, not fire, starting fire may be ordinary use of land
non-natural use of land?
refers to some unusual use of land
what are some natural uses of land?
- fire in a grate that spread’s to C
- defective electric wiring that causes fire
- domestic water supply
case for domestic water supply as natural part of land?
Rickards v Lothian
British Celanese v A H Hunt
use of land is natural because of the benefit obtained by local population
Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather (ignore)
storage of chemicals in factory is non natural use of land, regardless of benefit to local population
Read v J Lyons &Co and ‘the thing stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage?
material has to escape from one property onto adjoining property, no escape means no liability
Hale v Jennings Bros
‘thing stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage’ is not always strictly applied,
here, (chair o plane) stalls both operated on same land, neither stall holders owned the land yet liability was imposed
Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather and foreseeability
damage must be foreseeable (not escape), damage was not foreseeable and too remote from the site spillage
what is the defence of statutory authority?
if terms of an Act of parliament authorise D’s actions, this may be a defence
what is the defence of ‘an act of a stranger’?
if a stranger whom D has no control has been the cause of the escape causing the damage, then D may not be liable
perry v Kendricks transport transport
what is the defence of ‘an act of god’?
defence may succeed where there are extreme weather conditions that ‘no human foresight can provide against’, unforeseeable weather conditions
nicholas v marsland
what is the defence contributory negligence?
where C is partly responsible for the escape of the thing, the law reform act applies and damages may be reduced according to amount of C’s fault
what is the defence of volenti non fit injuria (consent)?
no liability where C has consented to the thing that is accumulated by D
