Rylands V Fletcher Flashcards
(21 cards)
RvF – Introduction
If D brings something out of the ordinary onto their land and stores it there, and if that thing escapes and causes damage to C’s property, then D will be liable. The C may have a claim under Rylands v Fletcher.
RvF – Definition / Rule
Following the case of Rylands v Fletcher, the D brings something onto their land and stores it there. It escapes and causes damage to the claimant’s land. This is a strict liability offence so there is no defence just because the D acted with care and attention. The C must prove five stages to claim:
Stage 1: Bringing Onto the Land and Accumulation – Rule
Firstly, there must be the bringing of a dangerous thing onto the land, which must accumulate on the D’s land.
Stage 1: Accumulation – Explanation 1
The defendant must bring something hazardous onto their land and keep it there. If it is naturally present on the land, such as weeds in Giles v Walker, it is not an accumulation.
Stage 1: Accumulation – Explanation 2
The thing must be accumulated for the defendant’s own purpose – Dunne v North West Gas Board.
Stage 1 – Side Rule: By-product Escape
The thing that escapes does not need to be the thing accumulated (by-product).
Stage 2: Likely to Cause Mischief if it Escapes – Rule
The thing which D brings onto his land must be likely to do mischief if it escapes.
Stage 2: Mischief – Explanation
It is a test of foreseeability – the damage must be foreseeable if the thing escaped, not that the thing itself is inherently dangerous (Hale v Jenning Bros).
Stage 3: The Thing Does Escape – Rule
The thing stored must escape from a place that the D had occupation of, or control over, to a place which is outside his or her occupation or control (Read v Lyons).
Stage 3 – Transco Definition
ESSENTIAL: Refer to the Transco definition of “escape” – must go beyond D’s control/land.
Stage 4: Non-Natural Use of Land – Rule
The use of the land must be considered as a non-natural use. This means D has brought something onto their property that was not naturally there.
Stage 4: Non-Natural Use – Explanation
Transco defined non-natural use as a use which is:
• “Extraordinary and unusual, considering the time and place”, or
• A “special use bringing increased danger to others”. This can be due to quantity, volume and place where it is stored.
Stage 5: Damage Must Be Reasonably Foreseeable – Rule
The damage must be of a foreseeable type and not too remote (Cambridge Water). If the D cannot predict it, they cannot prevent it.
Defence: Act of a Third Party (Stranger)
The D may escape liability if they were not able to reasonably foresee the actions of a third party and take steps to prevent them. The D must have no control over them (Perry v Kendricks).
Defence: Act of God
The D may escape liability if the escape is due to natural causes that no human foresight could have guarded against – it has to be unforeseeable (Greenock).
Defence: Statutory Authority
If the escape is caused by something the D is legally obligated to do under an Act of Parliament, then the D may have a complete defence.
Defence: Default of the Claimant (C)
If the damage was due to the act or default of the C, then the D will not be liable.
Defence: Consent
If the C expressly or impliedly consents to D accumulating the thing (knowingly accepts the risks), or the thing stored is for a common benefit, then the C will not be entitled to any remedies.
Remedy: Compensatory Damages
The C can be granted compensatory damages for any damage suffered to the property following the escape.
Side Rule: Personal Injury
Following the case of Transco v Stockport, Lord Hoffman confirmed that personal injury cannot be claimed for under Rylands v Fletcher.
Side Rule: Economic Loss
There is no liability for pure economic loss under Rylands v Fletcher. Established in the case of Weller v Foot and Mouth Disease Research Institute.
