Rylands v Fletcher 1861 Flashcards
(27 cards)
Simple explanation for R v F
A tort that imposes liability for an escape of something from your land that caused damage
Definition of R v F
‘A person who brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, is liable, for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape’
5 Elements that need to be proven in R v F
The defendant is the occupier of the land and has control over it
There is an accumulation or storage
The things is likely to cause mischief if it escapes
There is an escape
The storage amounts to a non-natural use of land
The damage is foreseeable
Under R v F what does the defendant have to have in the land?
An interest and control
Main POL for Hunter v Canary Wharf?
The defendant must own or rent the land
POL & Case For Weller & Co v Foot and Mouth Disease Research Institute
Case - Virus escaped, ban was put in place of moving cattle, and claimants claim they lost money on cattle auctioning
POL - claim failed as had no interest in the land it originally escaped to
Case & POL for Smith v Scott
Case - LA lent a house to a homeless family, neighbour tried to sue
POL - Couldn’t as they had no control over that house
Case & POL for Mason v Levy AutoParts?
Large quantities
Likely to cause mischief/dangerous
If something is stored in high/unusual quantities its more likely to be an non-natural use
There must be an ________ of something in order to sue under R v F
Accumulation
Case & POL for Hillier v Air Ministry
Electricity escaped from high voltage cables laid under the claimants land and killed his cows
Case & POL for Crownhurst v Amersham Burial Board
Yew trees grew over a boundary and poisoned animals
Case & POL for Hale v Jenning Bros
Chair-o-plane flew off fairground and damaged adjoining land
Something must _____ in order to sue under R v F
Escape
Case & POL for Stannard v Gore
Case - Stack of tires caught fire, damaged claimants land
POL - Not liable no escape
It must be considered a _____ ___ ___ _______ in order to sue under R v F
Non-Natural Use Of Land
POL & Case for Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather
Case - Leather company caused pollution, water company sued
POL - Seen as a ‘classic case of non-natural use’
POL for Transco v Stockport
POL - ‘ordinary user’ test
POL & Case for Giles v Walker
Case - D ploughed up land, blew seeds into neighbours land, caused damage
POL - Had been blown naturally so not liable
What must the damage be in order to sue under R v F?
Reasonably Foreseeable
Quote from Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather about damage
‘The defendant must have known or ought to have reasonably foreseen that damage of the relevant type’
All defences for R v F
Act of god
Act of a Stranger
Statutory Authority
Volenti
Case for Act of God
Nichols v Maryland
Case & POL for Nichols v Maryland
Case - Record thunderstorm destroyed lakes
POL - Not liable, rather an act from God
Case for Act of a stranger
Kendricks Transport
