Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
What is the rule from Rylands v Fletcher?
It applies when D has accumulated something dangerous on their land which escapes and causes damage. D would be responsible for the damage which is a natural consequence of its escape.
What are the 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 that thing must be a non natural use of the land
-The thing must actually escape and cause reasonably foreseeable damage
-C can sue D
Which case said that the defendant must control the land?
Read v Lyons
What is the legal principle of Smith v Scott?
Where the owner has let land, the tenants have control of that land. However, the owner can still also be in control of the land.
What amounts to bringing or accumulating something onto D’s land?
If it is anything D brings or accumulates themselves or D adds to something already on the land. If the thing was already there before D or came onto the land without D bringing it there, D cannot be liable.
What is the legal principle of Ellison v Ministry of Defence?
Where the thing causing damage naturally accumulated on the land, it can’t be said that D has brought it onto his land.
What does it mean that the thing must be likely to cause mischief if it escapes?
The reasonable person could foresee damage if the thing escapes. It does not have to be foreseeable that the thing will escape.
Which case proves that the likelihood of escape is not relevant, just that damage is foreseeable if the thing escapes?
Hale v Jennings
Which case would you use for fire and what is the legal principle?
Stannard v Gore- where fire escapes and causes damage, D must have brought that fire onto his land, not just objects which start or worsen the fire.
Which cases would you use for a non-natural use of land?
-Rickards v Lothian
-British Celanese v A H Hunt Ltd
-Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather
How did the court define a non-natural use of land in Rickards v Lothian?
Some special use bringing with it increased danger to others, not an ordinary use of the land. (Decide if the dangerous thing fits in with the purpose of the land).
What did British Celanese v Hunt say in relation to a non natural use of land?
If the use of land provides a benefit to the community, it is less likely to be a non natural use of land.
What did Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather say in relation to a non natural use of land?
If the thing that escapes is inherently dangerous (i.e. a high risk of danger from the use of land) it will be a non natural use despite the other two factors.
Which case defined an escape and what was the definition?
Read v Lyons. Escape means the thing goes into a place where D does not have occupation or control.
Which case says that the damage caused by the thing escaping has to be reasonably foreseeable?
Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather
