Rylands V Fletcher Flashcards
What is Rylands V Fletcher?
Is a land-based tort that is an extension of the nuisance rule.
It is a strict liability tort meaning the defendant will be liable even if he/she is not at fault.
This is not commonly used as most people who suffer damage of this sort would file a claim under negligence or nuisance.
What happened in Rylands V Fletcher?
Mill owner who built a reservoir n his land, had land checked by independent contractors who said that it was safe. Once built flooded mines below.
- Not been negligent as he trusted the independent contractors, yet he was still liable for the damages.
Who can sue and who can be sued?
- The claimant must have some degree of control over the land.
Weller & Co V Foot and mouth research institute: - Claim for loss of income failed as they did not own the infected land.
- The defendant must be the occupier who is in control of the land.
Smith V Scott: - Council were not to blame as it was the tenants of the house who were in control of the land at the time.
What 5 things must be proved to satisfy the rule found in Rylands V Fletcher?
- Brings onto land
- Non-natural use of the land
- Likely to do mischief
- Must escape
- Must cause damage
What is meant by brings onto land?
The defendant must bring something onto the land which does not usually occur there.
Giles V Walker:
- Thistles were naturally occurring, therefore he was not liable.
Crowhurst V Amersham burial board:
- Planted yew trees on the land therefore he was liable.
What is meant by a non-natural use of the land?
A non-natural use of the land is one which is not common place. This has changed several times. Take into account technological and lifestyle changes.
Richards V Lothian:
- Water was an ordinary use of the land so the claim failed.
British Celanese V AH Hunt:
- Storage of a metal foil in a factory was natural use of industrial land so the claim failed.
Cambridge water V Eastern counties leather:
- Storage of chemicals on industrial land was non-natural use of the land.
What is meant by likely to do mischief?
It must be foreseeable that the thing brought onto the land is likely to do mischief if it escapes.
The escape itself does not need to be foreseeable.
What is meant by escapes?
The thing brought onto the land must escape from the defendants land onto other land.
Read V Lyons:
- Stated ‘must escape from a place where D has occupation or control to a place which is outside his occupation or control.’
What is meant by damage?
The escape must cause damage, only damage which is reasonably foreseeably can be claimed for.
Whats the scope of damage which can be claimed for?
Only damage to land and goods can be claimed for.
Transco V Stockport metropolitan borough council:
- Established that cannot make a claim for personal injury.
What are the six defences available to Rylands V Fletcher?
- Act of a stranger
- Act of god
- Statutory authority
- Volenti non fit
- Default of the claimant
- Contributory negligence
What is meant by the defence ‘act of a stranger’?
If the escape was caused by a third party who the defendant has no control over. This will be a defence.
Box V Jubb
How do they satisfy the defence of Violenti non fit?
There will be no defence then the claimant has consented to the thing thats accumulated by the defendant.
How to satisfy the defence of statutory authority?
If the terms of an act of parliament authorise the defendants action this will amount to a defence.
Green V Chelsea waterworks
How to satisfy the defence of default of the claimant?
If the escape and damage is caused completely by the claimant, D will not be liable .
If only partially caused by the claimant contributory negligence will apply.
