Rylands V Fletcher

Question 1

What type of tort was developed in the case of Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 1

Strict liability tort - no mens rea needed for at least one element of the actus reus

Question 2

Rylands v Fletcher

Answer 2

Facts: D made a reservoir as a water supply for his mill. The contractors negligently failed to block off disused mineshafts so water flooded the neighbouring mines after the reservoir was filled.
Held: A claim could be made if material was brought onto land and stored, it was likely to cause mischief if it escapes, which amounted to a non-natural use of the land and which escaped and caused foreseeable damage

Question 3

Claimant

Answer 3

Must have an interest in the land affected

Question 4

Defendant

Answer 4

Will either be the owner of occupier of the land, it is assumed that the D must have some control over the land on which the material is stored

Question 5

What are the 4 elements

Answer 5

1. Bringing onto the land and an accumulation
2. The ‘thing’ is likely to do mischief if it escapes
3. Extraordinary and unusual use of the land
4. The ‘thing’ stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage, it must not be too remote

Question 6

1. Bringing onto the land and an accumulation

Answer 6

• there must be bringing onto the land of a substance
• if it is naturally present on the land, such as weeds in Giles v Walker, it is not an accumulation
• it cannot naturally accumulate on the land, such as rainwater in Ellison v Ministry

Question 7

2. The ‘thing’ is likely to do mischief if it escapes

Answer 7

• the thing which D brings onto his land must be likely to do damage if it escapes
• the court must recognise that, judged by the standards of the relevant time and place, there was an exceptionally high risk of danger should there be an escape

Question 8

Hale v Jennings Bros

Answer 8

Facts: a chair on a fairground ride became detached and injured a stallholder
Held: the owner of the ride was liable as the risk of injury was foreseeable if the chair became loose

Question 9

3. Extraordinary and unusual use of the land

Answer 9

• Rylands was originally intended as strict liability, but it was quickly limited with the additional requirement of non-natural use of the land by Lord Cairns
• case law suggests that ‘non-natural’ refers to some extraordinary or some unusual use of land. The time and place must be considered when concluding this
• in general, storage of things associated with the domestic use of land will not normally be classified as non-natural even though they may be potentially hazardous

Question 10

Rickards v Lothian

Answer 10

Facts: an unknown person turned on water taps and blocked pugholes on the D’s premises so that damage was caused to the flat below
Held: D was not liable as the use of water in domestic pipes was a natural use of land

Question 11

What did transo v stockport MBC state

Answer 11

That an action in Rylands would only be available where the use of the land was out of the ordinary, considering the time and place and whether they were activities from which there is public benefit was not relevant

Question 12

If the public have a benefit from the use of land is it natural

Answer 12

• previously, if the public have a benefit from the use of land then the court may have found the use to be natural
• however, the courts have been prepared to accept that certain activities may always be a non-natural use of land despite benefitting the public due to the level of danger involved
• this was shown in Cambridge Water Co. V eastern counties leather plc

Question 13

4. The ‘thing’ stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage, it must not be too remote

Answer 13

• the stored item must escape from one property onto an adjoining property
• if just a by-product of the ‘thing’ stored escapes, rather than the ‘thing’ itself, the element is not fulfilled e.g. if smoke escapes rather than the fire itself
• the thing escaping must cause forseeable damage, it must not be too remote

Question 14

Ponting v Noakes

Answer 14

Facts: C’s horse died after it had reached over the defendant’s fence and ate some leaves from a tree
Held: D was not liable under as the tree was entirely in the confines of the defendants land and there had therefore been no escape

Question 15

Read v Lyons

Answer 15

Facts: an explosion took place in a munitions factory, causing injury
Held: the material has to escape from one property onto adjoining property so there was no liability here as there was no escape

Question 16

Cambridge water co. V eastern countries leather

Answer 16

Facts: D’s stored chemicals to do with leather tanning which seeped into the soil after frequent spillages. Due to the pollution, the local water company had to spend millions of pounds moving its operations
Held: the HoLs decided that the damage was not reasonably forseeable and too remote from the site of the spillage

Question 17

What are the 6 defences

Answer 17

1. Volenti non fit injuria
2. Contributory negligence
3. Act of a stranger
4. Act of god
5. Statutory authority
6. Common benefit

Question 18

1. Volenti non fit injuria (consent)

Answer 18

There will be no liability where the claimant has consented to the thing stored by the D

Question 19

2. Contributory negligence

Answer 19

Where the claimant is partly responsible for the escape of the thing, then the Law reform (contributory negligence) act 1945 applies and damage may be reduced according to the amount of the claimants fault

Question 20

3. Act of a stranger

Answer 20

If a stranger over whom the D has no control has been that cause of the escape causing the damage, then the D may not be liable as in Perry v Kendricks Transport ltd

Question 21

4. Act of God

Answer 21

This defence will succeed where there are extreme weather conditions that ‘no human foresight can provide against’. It is only likely to succeed if there are unforeseeable weather conditions

Question 22

5. Statutory authority

Answer 22

If the terms of an act of parliament authorise the D’s action, this may amount to a defence

Question 23

6. Common benefit

Answer 23

If the source of the danger was maintained for the benefit of both the claimant and defendant, the defendant will not be liable for its escape

Question 24

Remedies

Answer 24

• A claimant must show destruction to his property in order to succeed in a claim for damages
• the level of damages will be the cost of repair or replacement of the property damaged or destroyed

Question 25

What are pecuniary losses

Answer 25

Easy to quantify like time off work Payed for by special damages

Question 26

What are non-pecuniary losses

Answer 26

Not easy to quantify such as pyschological harm General damages

Question 27

Payment

Answer 27

Can be made in a lump sum or over time if the defendant cannot afford the up front payment

Question 28

Mitigate losses

Answer 28

The claimant has a duty to mitigate losses