Rylands v fletcher tort

Question 1

What is the definition of the Rylands v Fletcher tort?

Answer 1

“the person who for purposes of his own, brings on his land and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep at his peril, and, if he does not do so, he is answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence if it escapes”

Question 2

What are the requirements for a claim under Rylands v fletcher

Answer 2

1)Identify who both the claimant and defendant are.
2)Defendant has brought something onto the land and accumulated it there
3)Something likely to cause mischief if it escapes.
4)Which is a non-natural use of the land.
5)Which then does escape
6)And causes reasonably foreseeable damage to the claimants property.

Question 3

1st requirement for Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 3

Find out if the claimant and the defendant are the correct people.
Claimant - Must have a legal interest in the land- Hunter v Canary wharf - Can be owners or tenants but not children, family or friends.
Defendant - Must be the accumulator or owner of the land where the thing was accumulated (Read v Lyons)

Question 4

2nd Requirement for Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 4

Defendant must have brought something onto the land and accumulated it there (Giles v Walker). This must be something brought onto the land that isn’t naturally occurring.

Question 5

3rd Requirement for Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 5

Non-natural use of the land. Transco v Stockport 2003 - Must be ‘extraordinary and unusual considering the time and place’. Mason v levy said it could be things stored in ‘dangerously high quantities’.

Question 6

4th requirement for Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 6

The thing does escape from D’s land.
The escape can be from land which the D has control of (British celanese v Hunt) or from circumstances over which the D has control (Hale v Jennings).

Question 7

5th requirement for Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 7

The thing causes reasonably foreseeable damage to property so it cannot be too remote from the escape.
Cambridge water co v Eastern countries leather: Does not cover personal injury.
Transco v Stockport 2003: Does not cover financial loss.

Question 8

What are the 5 defences to a Rylands v Fletcher claim?

Answer 8

1)Acts of a stranger
2) An act of God
3)Statutory right
4) Consent/Volenti
5) Contributory negligence

Question 9

1st defence in Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 9

Defendant is not liable if the escape is due to the actions of a stranger (Box v Jubb)

Question 10

2nd defence in Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 10

Refers to extreme natural conditions that no human foresight can provide against. Greencock corp v Caledonian Railways states it must be more than severe rainfall.

Question 11

3rd defence in Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 11

It is a defence if D’s actions are allowed under an act of parliament - Smeaton v Ilford Corp.

Question 12

4th defence in Rylands v fletcher

Answer 12

Consent (volenti) suggests the claimant suggester or agreed to accept the risk of harm. To be successful the claimant has to show that the claimant knew the precise risk involved and they consented to the voluntary risk of exercised free choice.

Question 13

5th defence in Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 13

Contributory negligence is an allegation that the claimant has partly contributed or caused their injuries - Peters v prince of wales theatre 1963