Rylands V Fletcher

Facts: Fletcher had a reservoir built on his land, sometime later the reservoir burst and flooded a neighbouring property run by Ryland.

Elements to an action

The claimant must have proprietary interest in the land/property affected (Hunter confirmed in Transco)

This tort is strict liability

The defendant is the owner or occupier of the land - they will have some sort of contract over the land

Bringing onto the land:

Giles: thistles were not ‘brought onto the land’ as they are naturally occurring

Ellison: rainwater not ‘brought onto land’

Dunne: must be for the defendant's own use or benefit if the claimant is benefiting the claim will fail

Something likely to do a mischief if it escapes:

Hales: must be foreseeable that if the ‘thing’ escapes, it is likely to cause damage

Shiffman: the escape itself need not be likely just its mischief

Ordinary things, therefore, come under the rule

Read: the ‘things’ must actually escape into the claimant's land

Stannard: when fire escapes, the defendant is usually not liable as they did not bring it onto their land

Damage is a foreseeable consequence:

Cambridge: the foreseeability/remoteness principle from wagon mound applies

Wagon Mound: the type of damage must be foreseeable

Non-Natural use of land:

Transco: non-natural means extraordinary and unusual,

Rickards: water supply to a domestic property is not a non-natural use

Mason: something quite ordinary may become non-natural through the quantity and measure of storage or the character of the area

Cambridge Water: chemicals are a classic non-natural use of land

Defences

Act of God: where natural events cause the harm - Nichols

Conset/common benefit: where the source of the potential harm benefits both parties - Dunn

Act of a stranger: escape is caused by a third party - Rickards

Statutory Authority: something permitted by statute - Green

Remedies

Damages- aims to put the claimant in their original position before the harmcv