Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
What are all the possible defences?
- statutory authority
- a right of prescription
- Independent contractor/non-delegable duty
- Common enemy doctrine
- estoppel by acquiescence
- Acts of God
- Contributory negligene/volenti
What is a statutory authority defence?
This is whereby a person is granted the authority, via statutory legislation, to carry out their private nuisance.
Which case outlines the two types of statutory authority defence?
Allen v Gulf Oil refining
what are the two types of statutory authority?
- express/implied exemption
-D undertook the activity without negligence with all reasonable regard and care for the interest of the other person.
What is the right of prescription?
If it can be shown tat D has carried out an activity uninterrupted with the claimant consent for at least 20 yeas, D can say they have a right od prescription to carry out that activity.
Only runs from the point at which the nuisance becomes actionable.
which case links to the right of prescription?
Sturges v Bridgeman
What is the independent contractor/non-delegable duty defence (with case)?
If nuisance caused by independent contractor engaged by D, D can rely on defence – Tinseltime Ltd v Eryl Roberts and Others [2011] EWHC 1199
what are the two exceptions to the third defence (independent C)?
A) D is strictly liable for nuisance caused by independent contractor where the undertook ultra-hazardous activities when committing the nuisance.
B) Dividing structure exception: Alcock v Wraith (1991) 59 BLR 20 – Where D has right to carry out work on a wall/dividing structure between two properties which involves risk to adjoining property.
what is the common enemy doctrine?
Permits landowner to erect barriers to prevent flood water coming onto land, diverting water onto neighbour’s land.
which case links to common enemy doctrine?
Arscott v Coal Authority [2004] EWCA Civ 892 – flooding of C’s land unforeseeable result of defensive works to D’s own land. No nuisance.
what is estoppel by acquiescence (with case)?
C may lose legal right to sue where D was allowed or encouraged by C to believe D was entitled to commit the nuisance, to D’s detriment – Jones v Stones [1999] 1 WLR 1739 (CA).
what is an act of god?
arising from natural events with no causal connection e.g. flood/moorland fires.
What is volenti (with case)?
Complete defence if C consented to interference with full knowledge and without duress. But , no successful case. Leakey v national Trust.
What is contributory negligence?
partial defence if C contributed to damage under Law Reform (contributory negligence act 1945).
what is the impact of Art 8 ECHR?
In theory you can bring the private nuisance action. Will go to the high court to seek an injunction (expensive), Local authority has a statutory duty of care.
Cases linking to Art 8 ECtHR…
Guerra v Italy, Lopez
Austria v Spain
what does article 8 mean for English law?
If there’s a view that you’ve been exposed to excessive pollution etc, there has to be a remedy and the remedy has to respect the way article 8 has been interpreted.
Means an individual can bring a direct action which may cover some of the areas which nuisance covers.
What is Rylands v Fletcher?
a hybrid form of nusiance.
what were the facts fo Rylands v Fletcher?
Consturcted a resoivoir with a series of connectign waters. The developers working for D found some disued mine shafts on their land and never sealed them proeprty. Collection of water was fill and some of the seal breached and the water floodd the mineshafts and onto the C’s proeprty.
which new rule was formaulated from R v F (and by who)?
LJ Blackburn - if someone brings something onto their property that could cause harm if it gets loose, they’re responsible for making sure it stays put. If it does escape and causes damage, they’re automatically considered responsible for any harm it causes.
which cases describes R v F as a hybrid form of nuisance?
Cambridge water v eastern Counties Leather
Transco v Stockport MBC
What specifically has to be brought onto the land?
D must have brought something artificially onto the land and they do this is a non natural way.
what is important since the Cambridge case?
Where harm arises, if all criteria of R v F are met, there ahs to be RF of harm caused.
Waht if D exercise greatest care and wasnt negligent (with cases)?
C does not need to prove negligence/culpability/wrongdoing on part of D – is it a strict liability tort:
R v F - held liable despite being unaware of shafts.
Bedford Police v Constable - strictly responsible.