Rylands v Fletcher

• Rylands v Fletcher is when a defendant has brought something onto their land, which is a non-natural use, which has then escaped and done some sort of damage.
• There are four elements to Rylands v Fletcher:

  1. Bringing onto the land and accumulates
  2. Likely to cause mischief if it escapes
  3. Non-natural use of land
  4. Escapes and cases reasonably foreseeable damage.
• The claimants must have an interest in the land, either by owning or renting it or by having a proprietary interest.
• The defendants must be the owner or occupier of the land and they must have some sort of control over it.

  Read v Lyons.
• If the thing is natural present then there is no liability.

  Giles v Walker.
• There is also no liability for something which naturally accumulates on land.

  Ellison v Ministry of Defence.
• The damage must be foreseeable, the escape doesn't have to be.
• It is foreseeable that the thing will cause damage if it does escape. For example:

  1. Gas and Electricity (Hillier v Air Ministry)
  2. A flag pole (Shiffman v The Grand Priory of St John)
  3. Tree branches (Crowhurst v Amersham Burial Board)
• Hale v Jennings Bro: Foreseeable escape
• The damage cannot be personal injury.

  Transco v Stockport Metro BC
• Lord Moulton Rickards v Lothian: "It must be some special use bringing with it increased danger to others."
• Non-natural use of the land will change and will be dependant on account of technological and social change.
• A use may be extraordinary at one time and place, not not in another.
• Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather: Storage of chemical at a factory was non-natural.
• The thing must escape from the land.

  Read v Lyons: "An escape from a place where the defendant has occupation or control over land to place which is outside his occupation or control"