Rylands v Fletcher

• Rylands v fletcher


  Concerns the escape of materials held on land likely to be dangerous if they escape

  Requires proof of physical and evidential damage - unlike private nuisance

  Tort of strict liability
• R v F case

  D built a reservoir using independent contractors

  Water escaped from it damaging C's land due to coal mining underneath the reservoir

  D was liable as he is responsible for anything escaping his land
• Elements for a successful claim

  1. The D brought something onto his land
  2. The D made a non-natural use of his land
  3. The thing that escaped was likely to cause mischief
  4. The thing did escape and caused damage
• 1. The D brought something onto his land


  E.G. water, gas, electricity, dangerous substances - anything not naturally occuring
• 2. The D made a non-natural use of his land

  Amounts to an extraordinary and unusual use of land
• 3.The thing was likely to do mischief if it escaped


  Must be proved that mischief is a foreseeable consequence if it escaped
• 4. The thing did escape and cause damage


  There must be movement of the thing onto the claimants land