Rylands v fletcher

Question 1

what is the definition of Rylands v fletcher?

Answer 1

a person who brings onto his land and keeps anything likely to do mischief, if escapes, must be answerable

must amount to non-natural use of land

escape usually singular

harm DOES NOT need to be foreseeable

Question 2

what are some examples of cues for RYLANDS V FLETCHER?

Answer 2

noises, fumes, explosions, gas leaks

Question 3

what are the four requirements for Rylands v Fletcher?

Answer 3

1. bringing onto the land and accumulating
2. something likely to cause mischief if escapes
3. Which amounts to a non-natural use of the land
4. which escapes and causes damage

Question 4

Who can claim?

Answer 4

anyone with an interest in the land

Question 5

what is some of the facts for Rylands v fletcher case?

Answer 5

D owned mil, hired contractors to create a reservoir
contractors did not block off disused mineshafts
mineshafts connected to ones in use
flooded

Question 6

Can a D be responsible for things that grow on the land already?

1

Answer 6

no liability

Question 7

what is a case for things growing on land already?
1

Answer 7

GILES V WALKER
no liability

Question 8

What is a case for a thing that escapes does not need to be the thing that is accumulated
1

Answer 8

Miles

Question 9

If D knows about the thing on the land and does nothing about it, can this lead to liability
and a case
1

Answer 9

yes
leakey v national trust (lose earth prone to slipping escaped onto neighbours land)

Question 10

who must bring the thing onto the land?
1

Answer 10

does not need to own it
could simply be a license

Question 11

what is the case for just having a license for the land?
1

Answer 11

Charing cross electrical supply co v hydraulic power co
(water, mains, liable for blackout in london)

Question 12

what is a case for benefit of the thing accumulated
1

Answer 12

smeaton v Ilford Corporation

Question 13

does the thing escaping have to be a source of foreseeable harm and a case?
2

Answer 13

yes, Hale v Jennings bros

Question 14

what definition did Lord Cairns give in the case of Rylands v Fletcher for non-natural use of land?
3

Answer 14

something which goes beyond the natural use of land

Question 15

what was the definition that Lord Moulton gave in Rickards v Lothian for non-natural?
3

Answer 15

brings increased danger to others and is not through the ordinary use of land, or a use of land that is not for the benefit of the community/

Question 16

what is a case for benefit of non-natural use of land?
3

Answer 16

British celanese v A H Hunt

Question 17

how might a use of land become non-natural?

Answer 17

any danger will council out a benefit to the public

Question 18

What is a case for the thing must escape and cause damage?

Answer 18

Read v J lyons and co (not liable)

Question 19

what is the definition for the thing that escaped must also cause foreseeable harm?

Answer 19

D must know or ought to reasonably see that type of damage would result from the escape

Question 20

what is a case for foreseeable harm?

Answer 20

cambridge water co v eastern countries (chemical)
contamination not known or foreseeable.

Question 21

who can be claimed against?

Answer 21

owner/occupier (read v lyons)
anyone with control over a set of circumstances- British Celanese
the tenants not the owner- Smith V Scott
the police - Rigby v Northamptonshire

Question 22

what are the 7 defences and explain each

Answer 22

1. Volenti non fit injuria- consent (peters v prince of wales theatre)
2. common benefit - source of potential danger maintained for p benefit (Dunne v north western)

3.Act of a stranger- if a stranger has caused the escaping (Bob v Jubb)

4. Act of God - extreme weather conditions (Nichols v Marsland)
5. Statutory authority- if a direct results of carrying out a duty (green v chelsea )
6. contributory negligence- if C is partly responsible (law reform act 1945)
7. c’s fault- if c’s land is very sensitive (s.Africa telegraph co v cape town)