TORT - Rylands V Flectcher - the escape of dangerous things

Question 1

definition of Rylands V Fletcher - the escape of dangerous things

Answer 1

where a persons property is damaged or destroyed by the escape of non-naturally stored material onto adjoining property

Question 2

elements of the escape of dangerous things

Answer 2

• bringing onto the land and an accumulation
• of a thing likely to cause mischief if it escapes
• which amount to a non-natural use of the land
• which escapes from one property to an adjoining property
• and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property
• strict liability

Question 3

2 parties

Answer 3

• claimant - must have an interest in the land - owner or tenant
• defendant
  READ V LYONS
  d must be the owner or occupier and have some control over the land

Question 4

steps of escape of dangerous things

Answer 4

1. bringing onto the land an accumlation
2. of a thing likely to cause mischief if it escapes
3. which escapes a non-natural use of the land
4. which escapes
5. and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to the adjoining property
6. strict liability
7. defences
8. remedies

Question 5

1st step

• definition
• case

Answer 5

bringing onto the land and an accumulation
- must be a substance which is not naturallly present on the land. D must bring substance onto land and accumulate.

GILES V WALKER
no liability if substance is naturally present e.g. weeds
ELLISON V MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
no liability for substance which naturally accumlates e.g. rainwater

Question 6

2nd step

• test for what?
• defintion
• examples

Answer 6

Of a thing which is likely to cause mischief If it escapes

• ## test for foreseeability
• not the escape which must be foreseeable, but some sort of mischief e.g damage, if it escapes
• e.g gas, electricity, poisonous fumes.
  if gas escapes, it is foreseeable that it would cause mischief

Question 7

3rd step
will change depending on what?
cases

Answer 7

which amounts to a non-natural use of the land

• will change depending on the technological and lifestyle changes over time e.g. petrol in car natural now, but wasn’t in the 1900s

RYLANDS V FLETCHER
must be a non-natural use of the land

TRANSCO PLC V STOCKPORT METROLPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL
must be an extraordinary and unusual use of the land - not storage of things associated with domestic use of land even if potentially hazardous

CAMBRIDGE WATER CO. V EASTERN COUNTIES LEATHER PLC
amount of things stored will be relevant. if vast quantities, most likely to be non-natural

Question 8

4th step
case
cases for fire

Answer 8

which escapes

READ V LYONS
must escape from one property to an adjoining property.

fire
- LMS INTERNATIONAL LTD V STYRENE PACKAGING AND INSTULATION LTD
fire started in D’s factory which had flammable material and spread to C’s adjoining property
D accumulated material which was a known fire risk - D liable
- BUT - STANNARD V GORE
claim not usually allowed for fire as the thing brought onto land must escape, not the fire started by the thing

Question 9

5th step

• case
• specific causation question

Answer 9

and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property

CAMBRIDGE WATER CO. V EASTERN COUNTIES LEATHER PLC
damage to adjoining property must be reasonably foreseeable and not too remote

• specific causation question
  is the ACTUAL damage caused reasonably foreseeable

Question 10

6th step

why Is there no tort fault?

Answer 10

strict liability

• the reason for or how the escape occurred does not need to be proved
  even if the escape is not D’s fault, he can still be liable
• even if d is careful, this is not a defence
• but unlike other strict liability torts though, defences are still available.
  balance strict liability with any possible defence (e.g. act of god)

Question 11

7th step

examples and cases

Answer 11

defences

PERRY V KENDRICKS TRANSPORT LTD.
act of stranger
if a stranger over whom D has no control is the cause of the escape, D may not be liable

NICHOLS V MARSLAND
act of god
extreme weather conditions ‘which no humane foresight can provide against’, D may not be liable

consent
if C has consented to the thing being accumulated by D

contributory negligence
where C is partly responsible for the escape

statutory authority
if an act of parliament authorises D’s actions

Question 12

8th step

• definition
• what can c not claim for

Answer 12

damges
damages - C must show damage to or destruction of property - damage for cost of repair or replacement of property

• cannot claim for personal injury