rylands v fletcher Flashcards
rylands v fletcher test
Accumulation.
non-natural use. (An interpretative battleground.)
Escape.
Damage.
Remoteness
Defences.
accumulation
The defendant must have ‘accumulated’ something on his or her land; and that thing must be something that, in the words of Blackburn J, is ‘likely to do mischief if it escapes’. The thing may be brought on to the land by the defendant. Alternatively, it may come on to the land by a natural process, provided that some action of the defendant has caused it to gather or accumulate. For example, the defendant may have constructed a reservoir that will fill with rainwater, or may have dammed a stream to create a lake.
non natural
Transco v Stockport MBC - ‘the use by the Council of its land … was entirely normal and routine’; non-natural use has to do with uses that are ‘extraordinary and unusual’
Transco v Stockport MBC (House of Lords):
facts – a leak developed in D’s water pipe (which supplied a block of flats); the escaping water saturated the embankment where C’s gas pipe was located; the embankment collapsed and left the gas pipe unsupported (which gave rise to a grave risk); C had to undertake costly remedial work.
Held: D was not liable; D’s use was natural.
Lord Bingham’s speech: ‘the use by the Council of its land … was entirely normal and routine’; non-natural use has to do with uses that are ‘extraordinary and unusual’
Rickards
increased danger to others
read v lyons
dangerous
George Fletcher on Rylands v Fletcher:
‘The critical feature’ of Rylands v Fletcher is ‘that the defendant created a risk of harm to the plaintiff [claimant] that was of an order different from the risks that the plaintiff imposed on the defendant’ (546).
Natural Uses: Some Examples
Domestic water supplies
Household fires
Electric wiring in houses and shops
The ordinary working of mines
Keeping trees and shrubs – unless, perhaps, poisonous:
Relevant considerations
(a) quantity of material; (b) the way it was stored; (c) the character of the neighbourhood
escape
Viscount Simon, Read v Lyons [1947] AC 156, at 168
‘Escape,’ for the purpose of applying the proposition in Rylands v. Fletcher, means escape from a place where the defendant has occupation of or control over land to a place which is outside his occupation or control
Read v Lyons
Viscount Simon,
Escape,’ for the purpose of applying the proposition in Rylands v. Fletcher, means escape from a place where the defendant has occupation of or control over land to a place which is outside his occupation or control
stannard v gore
stored tyers. fire broke out and spread to neighbour property due to tyres.
tyres themselves werent dangerous and the tyres themselves didnt escpae, it was the fire (natural)
Arscott
The rule in Rylands is ‘alive and well’ in relation to stannard
damage
damage caused by the mischief
Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
“a remedy for damage to land or interests in land.
not personal injury
Overseas Tankship case law.
the defendant will be liable even if he could not reasonably have foreseen that there would be an escape.
defences
act of god
consent
third party
stat authprity
Attorney- General v Cory Brothers.
Where the plaintiff has consented to permit the defendant to bring the mischievous thing upon his property there can be no liability
nichols v marsland
flooding
Rickards v Lothian.
malicious act third party by blocking toilet and turning on taps
