Ryland v Fletcher

• what are the 5 elements of rylands v fletcher?

  D must bring and collect the thing on their land for their own purpose or use

  D must be using land for a non natural purpose

  The thing must escape from D's land

  Damage must be caused to the C

  D must know or ought to reasonably foresee that the thing is likely to cause damage of a relevant kind- the damage must be reasonably foreseeable
• In terms of element one of rylands v fletcher, the thing that is collected must be for the D's own purposes or uses, but it doesnt need to benefit the D
• What case shows how the D will not be liable for the escape of naturally occuring things?

  Giles v Walker
• In terms of element 2 of rylands v fletcher, what does rickards v lothian define a non natural purpose as?


  it must be some special use bringing with it increased danger to others and must not merely be the ordinary use or such a use as is proper for the general benefit of the community”
• what case shows how industrial uses are unnatural in terms of element 2 of rylands v fletcher?


  Cambridge water v ECL
• In terms of element 3 of rylands v fletcher, the thing that the D is collecting must escape- this element is strict liability because it does not matter how or why the thing escaped. However, if the thing causing damage doesnt leave the D's land, then an action in negligence or occupiers' liability will be raised.
• which case gives an example of where rylands v fletcher doesnt apply, as the thing causing damage didnt leave the D's property?

  Read v Lyons
• Why do the cases of Hale v Jenning brothers and Transco PLC v Stockport metropolitan council contradict eachother?

  Hale v Jenning brothers states that rylands v fletcher can include personal injury, however the obiter dicta of a judge in the case of transco PLC v stockport metropolitan council stated that personal injury will not be allowed in rylands v fletcher.
• what case shows how the damage suffered by the C must be a reasonably forseeable consequence on the thing escaping, and which case confirms this?

  Cambrdige water v ECL- this decision was confiremd by the case of Transco PLC v Stockport Metropolitan council
• It doesnt have to be reasonably foreseeable that the thing would escape. It is the type of damage that is caused, that must be reasonably foreseeable
• what case shows how the collection of water in domestic plumbing is a natural use of the land?

  Rickards v Lothian
• which case defined what it means for the 'thing' to escape?

  Read v J Lyons and Co LTD
• What was the definition of the 'thing' escaping according to the case of Read v J Lyons and co LTD?

  An escape from a place where the defendant has occupation or control over land to a place which is outside their occupation or control
• what case allows the D to plea the defence of 'act of stranger' ?

  Perry v kendricks transport
• What case allows the D to plea the defence of consent (volenti) ?


  Peters v Prince of wales theatre
• what case allows the D to plea the defence of Act of god?

  Nichols v Marsland
• what when would the defence of act of god succeed?

  It would succeed where there are extreme weather conditions that no human foresight can provide against.
• What case allows a D to plead 'wrongful act of a third party'?

  LMS International LTD v Styrene packaging and insulation
• What case allows the D to plea Statutory authority?

  Charing cross electricity co v hydraulic power co
• What does it mean if the D pleas statutory authority?

  It means that the D believes that the terms of an act of parliament authorises their actions.