Rylands V Fletcher

Question 1

Quote/define Rylands V Fletcher

Answer 1

“A person who brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, is liable, for all damage which is the natural consequence of its escape”

Question 2

What are the 6 elements that need to be proven?

Answer 2

1.Control
2.Accumulation
3.Mischief
4.Escape
5.Non-natural use
6.Foreseeable

Question 3

1.Control case- Smith V Scott

Answer 3

-Local Authority let a house to a homeless family- in condition they wouldn’t cause any trouble
-Neighbours tried to sue the LA
-Failed as the tenants had control

Question 4

2.Accumalation case- Mason v Levy Auto parts

Answer 4

-Large quantities of petrol and paint
-Fire occurred
-Held liable

Question 5

3.Mischief/Dangerous case- Hale V Jenning

Answer 5

-Chair-o-plane in fairground
-Damaged adjoining land

Question 6

4.Escape case- Stannard V Gore

Answer 6

-D had a stack of tyres
-Caught fire and damaged Cs land
-Only fire escaped, not tyres
-Not liable

Question 7

5.Non natural use of land 3 Cases- 1.Giles V Walker

Answer 7

-D ploughed land and let Thistles to grow
-Blew seeds to neighbours land causing problems
-Not liable as they grew naturally

Question 8

5.Non natural use of land 3 Cases- 2. Cambridge Water V Counties Leather

Answer 8

-Storage of chemicals on industrial premises were seen as “classic case of non-natural use”

Question 9

5.Non natural use of land 3 Cases- 3. Transco V Stockport

Answer 9

“Ordinary test”

Question 10

6.Damage foreseeable Case- Cambridge Water V Eastern Countries Leather(Quote)

Answer 10

“The defendant must have known or ought to have reasonably foreseen that damage of the relevant type”

Question 11

What are the three defences

Answer 11

1.Act of God
2.Act of a stranger
3.Volenti

Question 12

Act of God case- Nichols V Marsland

Answer 12

-Thunderstorm, heaviest rain
-Broke banks and bridges
Defence successful

Question 13

Act of a Stranger case- Perry V kendricks Transport

Answer 13

-Ds parked their bus on their space, having drained a tank of fuel.
-Stranger removed the cap and then a child threw it into the tank
-Injuring another child
-Not liable

Question 14

Volenti(consent) case- Peters V Prince of Wales Theatre

Answer 14

-Claimant leased a shop next to theatre, sprinkler system broke and flooded both
- They agreed before so their action failed