Tort

Question 1

When can you bring a vicarious liability claim against a tortfeasor’s company?

Answer 1

When they were acting within the course of their employment.

Question 2

If the company prevents an employee from doing something, but they do it and cause harm to a third party, can the employer be held vicariously liable?

Answer 2

Yes.

Even if a company prohibits something, if it was done within the course of their employment, the employer can be liable.

Question 3

Under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, what can you claim if you suffer an injury and property damage?

Answer 3

Where a duty of care is established under the Act, as long as it was reasonably foreseeable, you can claim:

• Personal Injury
• Lost Work
• Expenses for the Cost of Repair of Replacement of Property Damaged

Question 4

Under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, is the owner of the premises liable for the acts of an independent contractor?

Answer 4

Not necessarily if the occupier hired competent contractors (Haseldine v Daw).

An occupier does not have to second guess work done by an expert, but may be liable if they knew of a problem (Ferguson v Welsh).

Question 5

When will a party be liable for negligent misstatements?

Answer 5

Hedley Byrne v Heller:

There must be an assumption of responsibility by the defendant giving rise to a special relationship with the claimant

AND

There must be reasonable reliance on the statement

Question 6

Under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976, who are the dependants and eligible to claim in the name of the administrator of the estate?

Answer 6

A spouse/former spouse/person living as a spouse in the same household for at least 2 years before death.

Any parent/ascendant/person treated as a parent.

Any child/other descendant/person treated as a child of the family.

Brothers, sisters, aunts, or uncles (or their children).

Question 7

Following Alcock, what factors must be applied in establishing whether a secondary victim has grounds for a psychiatric injury claim?

Answer 7

The psychiatric injury must have been induced by the shock, involving a sudden appreciation by sight/sound of a horrifying event.

It was reasonably foreseeable they would suffer psychiatric injury as their relationship of love and affection with the primary victim was sufficiently close.

Their proximity to the event/its immediate aftermath must have been sufficiently close in time and space.

Question 8

What is the 3 stage test in Caparo for establishing whether a duty of care existed?

Answer 8

1. Foreseeability of Damage
2. Relationship of Proximity between the parties
3. Fair, just, and reasonable to recognise the duty

Question 9

Investors suffer a loss after buying a company worth less than expected. Can they sue the accountants for negligently preparing annual financial reports?

Answer 9

No, because in preparing financial statements, the accountant owed a duty of care to the company, not the general public (Caparo v Dickman).

Question 10

To find a duty of care owed to investors by accountants, what must be shown?

Answer 10

The accountants must have known of the transaction the claimant had in contemplation.

Accountants knew the advice would be told to the claimant (directly or not).

Accountants knew it was likely the claimant would rely on the advice and they did to their detriment.

Question 11

If a student driver causes a car crash, to what standard will they likely be judged on for negligence?

Answer 11

They will likely be judged to the standard of the ordinary competent driver.

Nettleship v Weston [1971] - The act of driving set the standard to be judged against, even though she had a lack of experience

Question 12

What is the BUT FOR test?

Answer 12

On the balance of probabilities, BUT FOR the defendant’s breach of duty, would the claimant have suffered their loss?

Question 13

What was the outcome of Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital [1969]?

Answer 13

While the hospital was held to have breached their duty of care, it was shown that even if they had examined the patient properly, the patient would have died.

The claim failed the but for test, and therefore, causation was not established and the hospital was not liable.

Question 14

What is the duty of care under tort law?

Answer 14

A legal relationship between the claimant and defendant, under which the defendant owes the claimant a legal responsibility.

If that duty is breached, and such breach causes the claimant to suffer loss, then the claimant may have a claim in negligence.

But to establish negligence, C must first show that there is a duty of care between them and D.

Two kinds of duty (when D causes harm to C):

1. Established Duty - A relationship that automatically gives rise to a duty of care or one that has been identified in precedent / the facts before the case are analogous to an existing precedent
2. Caparo 3 Stage Test - Novel situation where there is no precedent or established duty

Question 15

What are the examples of the established duties of care?

Answer 15

One Road User to Another (e.g., driver to driver or driver to pedestrian)

Doctor to Patient

Employer to Employee

Manufacturer to Customer

Teacher to Pupil

Rescuer - When the defendant creates a dangerous situation which causes a third party to try and rescue another and that third party is injured

Question 16

When can a duty of care arise out of the defendant’s omission?

Answer 16

General Rule - No DoC owed if the harm suffered by the claimant was as a result of D’s failure to act

Exceptions:

1. An existing relationship between D and C
2. Rescue Scenarios - D tries to rescue but makes the situation worse
3. Control - D has a sufficient level of control over C (e.g., after arresting C)
4. Assumption of Responsibility by D over C (employment relationships, contract, or D previously took care of C)
5. Creating or Adopting Risk - D creates a dangerous situation and fails to take steps to stop one, e.g., starting a fire and not putting it out

Question 17

When a duty of care arise as a result of actions of third parties?

Answer 17

General Rule - No duty on D to prevent others from causing harm to c

Exceptions:

1. ‘Special Relationship’ between D and C arising out of a contract or if D has given a direct undertaking to C
2. ‘Special Relationship’ between D and the 3rd party that causes the harm to C. When D has a level of control or responsibility over the 3rd party.
3. Creation of a Source of Danger - The third party exacerbates a dangerous situation caused by D
4. Failure to Abate a Known Danger - D knows or ought to have known that the 3rd party has created a danger D ought to do something about (e.g., because it is on D’s property) but fails to do anything and C is subsequently harmed

Question 18

When is a duty of care breached?

Answer 18

A breach occurs when D falls below the standard of care required by law.

Two Key Questions -

1. How D ought to have behaved in the circumstances? - the standard of care. This is a legal question.
2. How did D behave? - Did they fall below the standard of care? This is a factual question.

Question 19

What is the standard of care?

Answer 19

What a reasonable person would have done in the defendant’s circumstances

Objective Test - Personal circumstance of D are ignored.

What level of care and skill did the activity D was undertaking require?

Certain level of skill or knowledge ? = Standard is that of a reasonably competent person carrying out that task

Question 20

What is the standard of care if D has a profession?

Answer 20

An ordinary member of that profession in D’s circumstances

E.g., if D is a doctor, the standard is that of a reasonably competent doctor - level of experience is irrelevant

If a body of opinion within that profession supports D’s actions, they will not have breached the standard, provided that the opinion is logical and not extreme/experimental/minor.

Question 21

How can the standard of care be higher of lower on the facts?

Answer 21

Depends on the circumstances of the case - e.g., a reasonably competent drive would drive more slowly and exercise more care on a road by a school, so in those circumstances, the standard is higher.

Question 22

How is the breach of the standard of care established?

Answer 22

Burden is on C to establish, on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not), that D’s actions fell below the required standard of care.

Courts can infer liability under the doctrine of “res ipsa loquiter” - it is common sense to say there has been negligence (D must have had control of the thing that caused the injury and the accident would not have happened had D managed the thing properly).

Question 23

What is the ‘material contribution’ test used to establish factual causation?

Answer 23

1. Where C has had cumulative exposure to toxins (such as dust or gas), and such exposure over time has cumulatively damaged C’s health and caused eht injury (such as absestosis - NOT mesothelioma)
2. Where C has a pre-existing condition, emergency or injury (such as an appendix issue) and a serious of medically negligent acts by D (being a hospital/doctotr) materially contributes to the injury worsening or developing (or death).

D’s negligence must have been made a material contribution (meaning more than negligible on the balance of probabilities) to the injury. This test operates where C is exposed to toxins through innocent means and because of D’s negligence.

C is awarded damages proportionately; up to the amount D is liable for the injury.

Question 24

When is the ‘material increase in risk’ test used to establish factual causation?

Answer 24

1. Where C suffers a non-cumulative (one off) injury (not mesothelioma or lung cancer) because of a one-off exposure to a toxic material, and C has worked for one or several employers. Assess whether each D has materially increased the risk of exposure to the toxin on the balance of probabilities. If one employer, 100% liable; if several employers, joint and severally liable.
2. Fairchild Exemption - C contracts mesothelioma or lung cancer as a result of a one-off exposure to asbestos as a result of working for one or a number of employers, but balance of probabilities test cannot be used to assess material increase in risk. Instead, provided the employer did materially increase the risk, they will be liable. If C contracted mesothelioma, joint and several liability between the defendants; if C contracted lung cancer, damages are apportioned.
3. Multiple defendants each contributing to the same one-off injury that is not an industrial disease (e.g., a car accident) and you cannot tell using the BUT FOR test who caused the injury on the balance of probabilities. Use the material increase in risk test, but still based on a balance of probabilities calculation.

Question 25

What is the test for remoteness of damage?

Answer 25

Was the harm to the claimant so far removed from D's negligence that it was unforeseeable by D (judged by the standard of a reasonable person) at the time the action occurred? Two Elements - 1. The kind of damage must be reasonably foreseeable at the time the breach occurred. 2. Only the kind of damage is foreseeable, not the amount.

Question 26

What is the THIN SKULL RULE?

Answer 26

You must take the claimant as you find them. D is liable for the full extent of any harm caused to C even if the harm is a result of some weakness or belief of C, provided that the injury caused the harm is foreseeable.

Question 27

When can an intervening act break the chain of causation?

Answer 27

1. Unforeseeable, intervening act of a 3rd party (unless it is an instinctive act). 2. Natural, unforeseeable intervening act (e.g., a storm). 3. Negligent Intervention of a 3rd party (must not be foreseeable; medical interventions unlikely to break the chain). 4. Reckless or intentional unforeseeable act of a 3rd party (unless D has a level of control over them). 5. The claimant's actions after the event cause further harm (more likely contributory negligence than to break the chain).

Question 28

What is the defence of consent?

Answer 28

Also known as "volenti non fit injuria". Complete Defence which arises in two scenarios: 1) C consents to the specific harm caused by D 2) C consents to the risk of harm To establish the defence, C at the time must have: 1. Had full knowledge of the nature and extent of the risk AND 2. Willingly consented to accept the risk of being injured due to the D's negligence

Question 29

When will the defence of consent not operate?

Answer 29

S.149 Road Traffic Act 1988 - Defence of consent is invalid for drivers of motor vehicles against claimant passengers. Defence will only apply where C chooses to run the risk voluntarily. Therefore, cannot apply in employer-employee situations and rescue situations (on the basis that the rescuer acted out of moral compulsion).

Question 30

What is the defence of illegality?

Answer 30

Complete Defence. C cannot recover damages for losses they suffer while engaged in a criminal act. The injury must have occurred at the time the criminal act was being done. But if the illegal act is trivial or only forms the background to D's negligence, illegality will not apply.

Question 31

What is contributory negligence?

Answer 31

Reduces the damages owed to C if C's own negligence contributed to their injury (e.g., not wearing a seatbelt). Does not defeat the claim. To establish CN: 1. C must have failed to have taken reasonable care for their own safety. 2. The failure must have contributed to C's loss. Injury must be reasonably foreseeable as a result of the carelessness. Reduction is looked at proportionately to the contribution to the injury.

Question 32

What are the different kinds of damages the court can award the claimant?

Answer 32

1. Exemplary Damages - To punish D 2. Aggravated Damages - To award C for a greater degree of suffering than would be expected. 3. Contemptuous Damages - C won but acted poorly during proceedings or did not settle. 4. Nominal Damages - A legal wrong has been committed but C suffered no harm. 5. Compensatory Damages - Designed to put C in the position they would have been in had the tort not occurred.

Question 33

What compensation will a claimant be awarded if they are injured and can no longer work?

Answer 33

1. Future Loss of Earnings. 2. Damages for the Specific Injury according to Court Guidelines. 3. Damages for Expenses incurred as a result of the injury, both up to trial and in the future (e.g., medical expenses). 4. Any cost of care, past and future (e.g., carers), provided that such costs are reasonable. 5. Non-pecuniary losses (Pain, Suffering, and Loss of Amenity), including for shortened life-span. 2 kinds of Compensatory Damages: - General - Special

Question 34

How does the court calculate Future Loss of Earnings?

Answer 34

The court uses a multiplicand (the salary lost as a result of not being able to work because of the injury) multiplies it by the multiplier (how many years C can no longer work) and applies a discount to the multiplier to reflect the fact that money can be invested/will be spent on other people throughout C's lifetime.

Question 35

How is the death estate of a claimant who dies as a result of the defendant's negligence compensated?

Answer 35

The claimant's death estate can bring the claim (administrator/executor), and the dependants of C can get compensation for their pecuniary losses (and possibly bereavement) as a result of D's actions. - Dependant = Spouse, Cohabitee (for at least 2 years), Child, Parent, Uncle, Aunt, Brother or Sister - Dependant can get damages for: - Loss of Earnings provided to the household by the deceased (that would have been provided up to the date of natural death) - "Value of Service" of the deceased (e.g., childcare, maintenance jobs etc) - Funeral Expenses Contributory Negligence can reduce the damages payable The spouse, cohabitee or (if D was a minor) D's parents can also get bereavement damages (£15,120).

Question 36

How can you determine if the person who committed the negligent act is an employee of the defendant (vicarious liability)?

Answer 36

If there is an employment contract, you have an employee. If it is a contractor, volunteer or agent, look to see if there is a relationship "akin to employment". Factors for "akin to employment": 1. Level of control the company holds over the individual 2. Whether the worker is managed by the company or accountable to it 3. Whether they wear company uniform 4. How integrated they are in the business An independent contractor running their own business and doing work for an employer will not establish VL.

Question 37

What are the kinds of victims for the purposes of establishing a duty of care for pure psychiatric harm?

Answer 37

Primary Victim = Someone actually involved in the incident. This will be someone actually in the area of danger or who reasonably believed they were in the danger zone (meaning it was reasonable for them to think D's negligence would harm them, causing the shock). Secondary Victim = Not actually involved in the incident. They witness an injury to someone else or fear for the safety of another.

Question 38

When is a duty of care established for a primary victim for the purposes of pure psychiatric harm?

Answer 38

Where it is reasonably foreseeable that D's negligence may cause physical harm to C, they can recover for any psychiatric harm they suffer.

Question 39

What is pure economic loss and what is the rule on its recoverability?

Answer 39

Loss that is not a consequence of any other type of harm - financial loss stemming directly from the harm caused by the negligent act or omission. General Rule - Non-recoverable. Exception - Negligent Misstatement.

Question 40

How can an employer discharge their common law duty to ensure their employees are reasonably safe at work?

Answer 40

1. Competent Staff 2. Adequate Plant and Equipment 3. A Proper System of Work 4. Safe Workplace

Question 41

What is the duty of care owed under the Occupiers' Liability Axct 1957?

Answer 41

An occupier owes a duty of care to all lawful visitors on the premises in respect of dangers posed by the state of the premises. D - Must be an occupier C - Must be a legal visitor

Question 42

Who is an occupier for the purposes of OLA 1957?

Answer 42

The occupier is someone who controls the premises - does not have to be the actual owner, but can be someone who has day to day responsibility for the upkeep and running.

Question 43

When is the claimant a "visitor" for the purposes of OLA 1957?

Answer 43

Visitors are those who have express or implied permission to be on the occupier's land. If they go beyond this permission, they are trespassers.

Question 44

What is the standard of care under the OLA 1957?

Answer 44

Reasonable Occupier - The occupier must take such care as is reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that visitors are reasonably safe for the purposes for which they are invited. Breach occurs when they fall below this standard.

Question 45

What is the effect of adequate warnings under the OLA 1957?

Answer 45

An occupier can discharge their duty by taking reasonable steps to give a warning of a danger on the premises. The warning MUST be adequate, this means it must be: 1. Specific - Must mention the specific danger it is warning against. 2. May need to be clearer depending on the type of victim who could be harmed.

Question 46

Can liability be excluded under OLA 1957?

Answer 46

Yes. Occupier can exclude liability for loss from the state of the premises via a notice. Must take reasonable steps to bring this notice to the attention of the visitor. If the occupier is a business or sole trader, subject to UCTA and CRA - Cannot exclude damage for personal injury or death, and exclusion for damage to property must be reasonable/fair.

Question 47

What defences are available to a claim under the OLA 1957?

Answer 47

1. Consent - Warning notices can provide this 2. Contributory Negligence

Question 48

What is the duty of care under the OLA 1984?

Answer 48

The occupier owes a duty to take reasonable care to see that trespassers do not suffer injury as a result of dangers due to the state of the premises. The duty is only in respect of personal injury (not property damage). Only arises if 3 conditions are satisfied.

Question 49

What are the 3 conditions of a duty arising under the OLA 1984?

Answer 49

1. Occupier is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe it exists. 2. Occupier knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that someone is or may be in the vicinity of the danger (even if a trespasser). 3. The risk is one against which in all the circumstances the occuper may be reasonably expected to offer some protection.

Question 50

What is the standard of care under the OLA 1984?

Answer 50

Reasonable Occuper (such care as is reasonable in all the circumstances of the case to see that the trespasser does not suffer injury on the premises by reason of the danger concerned). The standard does not change for children or skilled professionals. Cost of precautions and the financial position of the occupier can be taken into account.

Question 51

What defences and exclusions are there under OLA 1984?

Answer 51

D can restrict or exclude liability by notice, but is subject to the CRA 2015 if a business or sole trader (UCTA does not apply). Consent Contributory Negligence

Question 52

Why use a product liability action under tort?

Answer 52

If you want to sue the manufacturer for a defective product with whom you have no contract.

Question 53

What is the duty of care manufacturers have to end-users under the tort of negligence?

Answer 53

To supply a product to the ultimate consumer in the same state they left the production line and without any latent defects that the consumer has not been made aware of. Supplier can be liable if they do not check the product before sale and: - It was obvious it should have been safety checked - The manufacturer told them to check it - They knew of a defect The packaging or labelling is included as part of the 'product'.

Question 54

What can a consumer claim for under negligence?

Answer 54

Property damage and personal injury caused by the defective product. Cost of the defective product itself cannot be claimed for as it is pure economic loss.

Question 55

What is the standard of care for a product negligence claim and how is breach established?

Answer 55

Reasonable Care - Reasonable Manufacturer, Repairer, Installer, and Supplier If C can prove on the balance of probabilities that the product was faulty, the court infers a breach of the standard. D can rebut this by showing that C's interference caused the defect.

Question 56

How are causation and remoteness proved for product negligence?

Answer 56

1. Factual Causation - But for the defect in the product, no harm would have occurred. 2. Legal Causation - The chain has not been broken (no interfering act). 3. Remoteness - The loss caused by the defect must be reasonably foreseeable.

Question 57

What defences are available for a claim of product negligence?

Answer 57

1. Consent - C knew the product was faulty but used it anyway. 2. Contributory Negligence Manufacturers cannot exclude or limit liability for damage (PI/death/product damage) resulting from a defective product in a contract term, by notice or in any other way.

Question 58

What is the main advantage of using the Consumer Protection Act 1987 over negligence in a product negligence claim?

Answer 58

The CPA 1987 has strict liability - meaning that you do not need to prove any fault. Provided that the product has a 'defect', the manufacturer is liable if there is a loss (subject to causation and any defences).

Question 59

Who can sue and who can be sued under the Consumer Protection Act 1987?

Answer 59

Who can sue? - Anyone who suffers damage as a result of the defective product. Who can be sued? - (If more than one of the following is liable, you have joint and several liability): - Manufacturer - Own-Brander (A person who puts their brand on the product and holds themselves out as a producer; e.g., tesco finest) - Importer - From outside the UK into the UK - Supplier - Only if they cannot identify the manufacturer, otherwise not liable A claimant can claim for death, PI, and property damage which must exceed £275. Cannot claim for the cost of the product itself (pure economic loss).

Question 60

What is a defect under the Consumer Protection Act 1987?

Answer 60

Defect = When the safety of the product is not such that persons are generally entitled to expect. Warnings, instructions, and labelling on the packaging can be taken into account - if there is adequate warning, manufacturer is unlikely to be liable.

Question 61

What is the "developmental risks" defence?

Answer 61

If: a) At the time of making the product, the producers had no way of knowing there was a defect becasue science had not advanced that far/no one had yet discovered there was a defect AND b) The defect/risk of defect could not have been foreseen. (Mostly covers the manufacture of medicine)

Question 62

What defences (except developmental risks) are availale under the Consumer Protection Act 1987?

Answer 62

1. Defect was because D complied with legal requirements (only if it was an inevitable result of compliance) 2. D did not supply the product to another 3. Defect did not exist when D supplied the product 4. Manufacturer of component parts will not be liable if the fault is because of the finished whole product or instructions of the finished whole product. 5. Contributory Negligence

Question 63

What is the limitation period under the Consumer Protection Act 1987?

Answer 63

3 years from the harm being suffered or from discovery of the harm, whichever is later, BUT a claimant only has 10 years form the time the product was put into circulation by the manufacturer.

Question 64

What is private nuisance and what needs to be established to make a succesful claim?

Answer 64

Any unlawful interference with a person's reasonable enjoyment of land or some right over it. To make a successful claim, you need: - An interference that is unlawful - The ability to sue - Damage - Causation and Remoteness - No effective defences apply

Question 65

What is an interference for the purposes of private nuisance?

Answer 65

4 main types: 1. Encroaching on a Neighbour's Land (e.g., trees overhanging a garden) 2. Physically damaging a Neighbour's Land 3. Interfering with the Neighbour's Quiet Enjoyment of their Land (e.g., loud music, dust, etc) 4. Extreme Visual Intrusion, outside of common or ordinary use (e.g., a public balcony that overlooks someone's flat)

Question 66

What makes an interference "unlawful"?

Answer 66

If the interference is so substantial and unreasonable that the claimant's use of their property is unbearable. Note - Encroachment is always unlawful and property damage is very likely unlawful unless the property that is being damaged is "hypersensitive". Range of factors to consider unlawfulness: 1. Duration and Frequency - Longer and more frequent = more likely to be unlawful 2. Ridculousness of D's actions and how they affect C 3. Character of the Neighbour (IGNORE FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE) 4. Abnormal Sensitivity - Would a normal person/property have been affected in the same way? 5. Malice - If D has an evil motive, their actions will be unlawful

Question 67

Who can sue and be sued for private nuisance?

Answer 67

Who can sue? - Must have an interest in the land (usually the owner of the freehold/leasehold). Who can be sued? -- - The creator of the nuisance (even if they no longer live on the land) - The occupier if: - Their employee or contractor makes the nusiance; or - They have "adopted" the nusiance (learn about the nuisance but do not take reasonable steps to deal with it - reasonable depends on severity of the interference and the cost of dealing with it) - The tenant - The landlord if: - They authorised it - Knew about it when they let the property - Or fails to repair as required in the lease (and this failure causes the nuisance)

Question 68

What must be suffered to make a claim in private nuisance?

Answer 68

Damage (physical property damage or personal discomfort) must have been caused by the nuisance, and that damage must have been a reasonably foreseeable result of the nuisance to the defendant at the time they did it.

Question 69

What are the "effective" defences to private nuisance?

Answer 69

WILL DEFEAT THE CLAIM 1. Prescription - The interference has been going on against the claimant for 20 or more years. 2. Statutory Authority - Can only be used by public authorities. An Act of Parliament permits the nuisance - must be an inevitable result of this. 3. Contributory Negligence. 4. Consent - Only if C specifically agrees to the nuisance. 5. Act of God - The nuisance is a result of some random freak act of nature (i.e., a flood) unless D "adopts" it. 6. Necessity - If there is an imminent danger to life and D took reasonable steps to get rid of that danger unless the danger was caused by D in the first place.

Question 70

What are the "ineffective" defences to private nuisance?

Answer 70

WILL NOT DEFEAT THE CLAIM 1. The claimant came to the nuisance. 2. Public Benefit Defence 3. Others also causing the nuisance. 4. Planning Permission - Not a defence in itself but if D is acting within PP, this is more likely to make an act lawful.

Question 71

What remedies are available for nuisance?

Answer 71

1. Damages - To compensate for any physical damage to property or personal discomfort. 2. Injunction* - To prevent D from committing a nuisance in the first place or ordering them to stop or repair something. 3. Abatement (Self-help) - C can use this before they go to court. They must give notice to D first. Then, if the nuisance does not stop, they can enter D;s property and resolve the interference themselves. *An injunction is only granted if damage will not adequately compensate C - Public Benefit is a big factor in whether to award an injunction.

Question 72

What elements are required for a claim under Rylands v Fletcher?

Answer 72

1. D brings something onto their land capable of damage (e.g., water, electricity, cattle, sewage, fumes) 2. That thing must escape. 3. The escape must happen while the land is being used in an unusual and extraordinary way. 4. Causes foreseeable damage. Note - It must be the actual thing, not something associated with it, e.g., a fire caused by tyres goes onto C's land but the tyres stay put - does not count. You must have an interest in land to sue.

Question 73

What defences are available for a claim in Rylands v Fletcher?

Answer 73

1. A random act of a stranger caused the thing to escape - must an unforeseeable act. 2. An act of god caused the escape. 3. Statutory Authority - The thing was out on the land by D because the statute authorised it. 4. Consent - C consented to the thing being out on D's land. 5. Contributory Negligence

Question 74

When can an individual bring a claim in public nuisance?

Answer 74

If the public nuisance: 1. Affected the reasonable comfort and convenience of a "class of His Majesty's subjects" (must actually affect a large group of people). 2. The C within that group has suffered specific, particular harm above and beyond the rest of the group affected. No need to have an interest in the land to sue. Can be an isolated one-off incident. Defences are the same as private nuisance.