Rylands V Fletcher Flashcards
What is Rylands v Fletcher?
Protects occupiers against intereference due to isoolated escape of something dangerous from neighbouring land.
Strict liability, D liable for escape even though no fault or negligence
Only damage to property
What happened in Rylands v Fletcher (1868)
D constructed reservoir, water spread to working mine of C causing damage, D strictly liable
What is rule for Rylands v Fletcher?
A person who brings into their land and keeps there a dangerous thing in the course of a non-natural use of the land is strictly liable from any damage caused by its escape
What must C prove?
On balance of probabilities:
1. They have to bring about action, and person they are suing is capable of being D
2. D brought on to their land kept there (accumulation)
3. A dangerous thing
4. For a non-natural use
5. That thing escape onto adjoining property, and
6. Caused reasonably forsseable damage
Who are the parties
C: must have legal interest in land
E.g. Transco v Stockport (2004)
D: person who has control of land
E.g. Rylands v Fletcher
What does it mean for D to bring it into the land?
Dependent must be bringing onto the land a substance, cannot be something already present or natural
E.g. Giles v Walker (1890)
Thistles spread to neighbouring land, natural
What is a dangerous thing considered as?
Something likely to damage if it escaped, or things that pose an exceptional risk if it escapes
E.g. Transco v Stockport (2004) water flowing in pipe for domestic water supply was not an exceptional risk
What about damage by fire?
Damage by fire spreading does not usually give rise, as it must be the thing that fuels the fire which escapes and is dangerous
E.g. Stannard v Gore (2012)
D stored tyres for tyre fitting company, tires set on fire and spread, not liable as not exceptionally dangerous
Unless, material is a known fire risk
E.g. LMS Intl. v Styrene (2005)
F stored large quantity of flammable material, fire spread to neighbour
How is non natural use established?
Use of land which is extraordinary and unusual
Transco v Stockport (2004) sulting water for flats was ordinary
How is an escape defined
There must be an escape form land that D controls to land they don’t own
E.g. Rylands v Fletcher (1868)
How is damage defined?
Escaping thing must cause reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining land
E.g. Cambridge Water v Easter Counties Leather (1994)
Not RF that D’s activities would contaminate C’s spring, too remote from spillage
What are defences to Rylandsv
Act of stranger, deliberate and unforeseen (Perry v Kendricks 1956) 3rd party lit match in patrol tank of D’s coaches
Act of god: Nichols v Marsland (1876) water escaped after prolonged and violent rainstorm
Statutory authority: Green v Chelsea Waterworks (1894) D had statutory authority to maintain supply of water
Consent: Peters v Prince of Wales Theatre (1943)
Sprinkler system installed for both C and D, and C consented to installation when he took lease
Contributory negligence
