Tort Law - The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards Preview

Law Second Year > Tort Law - The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher > Flashcards

Flashcards in Tort Law - The Rule in Rylands v Fletcher Deck (42):
1

Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties judgment on presence of substance

Chemicals classic example of non-natural use - look at natural process of it getting there

2

What was the interpretation of the presence of the substance at the HoL in Rylands?

'Non-natural' use

3

Perry v Kendrick general

Petrol tank, boys

4

What is the enterprise theory of liability?

Policy requiring costs of a non-natural enterprise to be internalised and borne by the responsible party

5

What does an act of god need to be?

Overwhelming and extraordinary natural event

6

What kind of liability is in the rule in Rylands?

Strict

7

Read v Lyons general

Explosives factory

8

What judge in what case gave the 'not naturally there' test as something you could be expected to insure against?

Lord Hoffman in Transco plc v Stockport

9

Rylands v Fletcher general

Reservoir, mineshafts

10

Water pipe

Transco plc v Stockport

11

Transco plc v Stockport general

Water pipe

12

Why is the confirmation in Transco plc v Stockport of Rylands as a particular application of nuisance to isolated escapes problematic?

Cambridge water happened over a period of time

13

Borehole PCE

Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties

14

Transco plc v Stockport on damages

Rules on standing and damages same as for negligence

15

Perry v Kendrick judgment

No liability under Rylands because deliberate act of a 3rd

16

What case gives no liability under Rylands for deliberate act of 3rd

Perry v Kendrick

17

What judge in Read v Lyons gave the 'non-natural' use interpretation?

Lord Macmillan

18

How did Read v Lyons justify the need for the substance to escape?

Rylands is already an exception to the general rule of fault-based liability

19

Ryeford v Sevenoaks general

PEL

20

What is the main reason Goff rejects enterprise theory of Rylands?

Law Com failed to recommend such a proposal

21

What did Goff reject in regard to foreseeability in Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties?

D not liable for continuing escape now it was foreseeable as he could do nothing

22

Ryeford v Sevenoaks judgment

Claim for PEL only if consequential upon property damages

23

What judge in what case rejected the enterprise theory of Rylands?

Goff in Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties

24

Burnie Port v General Jones general

Australia Rylands

25

Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties general

Borehole PCE

26

Requirements for Rylands

Accumulation of a dangerous substance on D's land, substance not naturally present, escape and damage

27

What judge in what case suggested Rylands is the beginning of an 'enterprise liability' theory?

Hoffmann in Transco v Stockport

28

Transco v Stockport on Burnie Port v General Jones

Rejected assimilation of Rylands with negligence

29

Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties remoteness

KIND of damage (not escape) reasonably foreseeable

30

Transco plc v Stockport judgment on presence of substance

Natural use of land - per Hoffmann, something you expect to insure yourself against

31

What are the two possible defences to Rylands

Deliberate acts of a 3rd and act of god

32

What was the interpretation of the presence of the substance at the first level in Rylands?

Not naturally there

33

Why did Rylands not apply in Read v Lyons?

No escape and exactly what you'd expect - no 'non-natural use'

34

What case gave the remoteness rule for Rylands?

Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties

35

What judge in Rylands gave the requirements for the rule?

Blackburn J

36

Read v Lyons on damages

No claim for personal injury

37

What case confirmed Rylands is a specific application of nuisance to isolated escapes?

Transco plc v Stockport

38

Why is the rule in Rylands attractive to C?

Strict liability

39

Burnie Port v General Jones judgment

Assimilating Rylands with negligence

40

Read v Lyons on presence of substance

'Non-natural' use

41

What case showed rules on standing and damages same as for negligence?

Transco plc v Stockport

42

What case showed no claim for personal injury in Rylands

Read v Lyons

Decks in Law Second Year Class (74):