click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Tort Law - Rylands
Rylands v Fletcher
Question | Answer |
---|---|
Test for Rylands | (1) D must bring harm onto the land (2) use of the land is non-natural (3)thing accumulated must be likely to cause damage if it escapes (4) escape (5) it caused foreseeable damage |
AG NI v Corke | people accumulated, they escaped and toileted a neighbouring property |
Read v Lyons | no escape (artillery shell in munitions facility) |
Cambridge Water v ECL | chemicals non-natural, but unforeseeable damage |
Giles v Walker | Thistle seeds that escaped grew naturally |
Transco v Stockport | Water in pipes is a natural use of land + can't claim for PI in rylands (non-natural = "extraordinary and unusual") |
Hale v Jennings Bros | Chairoplane escape - unusual - PI allowed |
Stannard v Gore | Tyres accumulated, but fire escaped |
Nichols v Marsland | Act of god caused flood, water in dam flood neighbouring property |
Rickards v Lothian | Act of stranger |
Peters v Prince of Wales Theatre | sprinklers - Common benefit defence |
Mason v Levy | Accumulation of flammable materials is non-natural |
Can you claim for Personal Injury in rylands? | no |