Ryland's v Fletcher

• Ryland v Fletcher

  • Concerns the: bringing on to land of something that escapes and causes damages to neighbouring land
  • Can only claim for property damage
• Claimant = Must have an interest in the land affected. Own, rent or have some other form of property interest in the land affected.
• Defendant = Must be either owner or occupier of land. Has to satisfy four requirements of Rylands v Fletcher

  (Read v Lyons)
• Four elements of Rylands v Fletcher:

  1. The bringing onto the land and an accumalation or storage
  2. Thing likely to cause mischief (damage) if it escapes (what damage it caused)
  3. What amounts to a non - natural use of the land
  4. Which does escape and causes reasonably foreseeable damage to adjoining property. (Could it cause damage)
• The bringing on to land (Giles v Walker)

  D must bring a substance onto the land and not naturally occurring
• The substance is likely to do mischief (damage) if it escapes (Hale v Jennings Bros)

  The substance brought onto the land must be likely to do damage if it escapes. Test of foreseeability. Damage must be foreseeable.
• A non - natural use of land (Transco v Stockport MBC)

  If something is unatural (unreasonable use) gets on fire and spreads you are liable. If something natural gets on fire and spreads. You are only liable if you have been negligent.

  Lord Cairns - Extraordinary (unusual) or unusual
• The thing stored must escape and cause foreseeable damage (Cambridge water Co v Eastern Counties Leather)

  Has something escaped and is there foreseeability