Skip to content
MarkSchemeMarkScheme
Sign up — no card

9084 · 4.2.3

Rylands v Fletcher

**Rylands v Fletcher** (4.2.3) — work through **each element** systematically in problem answers. Note **defences** and the crucial foreseeability requirement from **Cambridge Water** and the narrowing of the rule in **Transco**.

Need to know

What you need to know

  • Established a form of strict liability where fault for the escape is not required.
  • The defendant must bring a 'thing' onto the land and accumulate it for their 'own purposes'.
  • The 'thing' must be 'likely to do mischief if it escapes'.
  • The defendant is liable for the 'natural consequence' of the escape, provided the type of damage is foreseeable.

Explanation

Rylands v Fletcher

  1. Established a form of strict liability where fault for the escape is not required.
  2. The defendant must bring a 'thing' onto the land and accumulate it for their 'own purposes'.
  3. The 'thing' must be 'likely to do mischief if it escapes'.
  4. The defendant is liable for the 'natural consequence' of the escape, provided the type of damage is foreseeable.
Mark this topic →Open full visual lesson