rylands v fletcher

Cards (29)

  • where a person's property is damaged or destroyed by the escape of non naturally stored material onto adjoining property
  • transco / canary wharf
    claimant must have a legal interest in land to pursue claim
  • read v lyons
    defendant needs to be the owner or occupier of land where the dangerous things were accumulated
  • claimant must show four essential elements of tort
    1. material was brought onto land
  • giles v walker
    covers artificial accumulation of material but not natural accumulation like weeds
  • ellison v mod
    or rainwater
  • transco
    2. thing was something highly likely to cause mischief if it escapes
  • must be foreseeable that thing brought onto land is likely to cause mischief if it escapes
  • hale v jennings bros

    escape itself doesn't need to be foreseeable
  • shiffman v grand priory
    thing itself doesn't need to be inherently dangerous
  • stannard v gore
    must be accumulated thing itself that escapes and causes damage (eg fire)
  • lms international
    liability for fire cases only arises if negligently dealt with or started
  • 3. must amount to non natural use of land
  • rickards v lothian
    non natural use means not a common place
  • transco
    must be extraordinary and unusual considering time and place
  • stannard v gore
    if reasonable for d to have the material it is not a non natural material use of land
  • mason levy autoparts

    things stored in large quantities can amount to non natural use
  • 4. things stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage
  • read lyons
    stored item must escape from one property onto an adjoining property
  • cambridge water
    if damage is too remote, not reasonably foreseeable
  • d may be able to raise a defence
  • may be volenti - c has consented to thing accumulated
  • perry v kendricks
    an act of a stranger
  • nichols v marsland
    an act of God eg. extreme weather conditions
  • charing cross electricity co

    statutory authority (act must specify)
  • ponting v noakes
    contributory negligence - where c is partly responsible for escape of thing
  • remedies - c must show damage to his property to succeed, will be given as cost or repair the property damaged
  • transco
    not possible to claim for personal injury under the tort