Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
:red_cross: Strict Liability :red_cross: (Defences (Statutory authority,…
:red_cross: Strict Liability :red_cross:
Ryland v Fletcher (1868)
By Blackburn J,
the rule of law is that the person who for his own purpose brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his perils, and if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape
Elements
of strict liability
The defendant brought something onto his land
Accumulation
For his own purpose
The defendant made a "non-natural use" of his land (per
Lord Cairns, LC)
Water
Trees
Ellectricity, gas and explosives
Motor cars
The thing was something likely to do mischief if it escapes and;
The escape itself
does not have to be forseeable
Hale v. Jennings
Ang Hock Tai v. Tan Sum Lee
The thing did escape and cause damage
Per Viscount Simon,
escape is
defined
as escape from a place where the defendant has occupation or control over land to a place which is outside his occupation or control
The escape must cause damage as in the case of
Cambridge Water Co v. Eastern Counties Leather
and
Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah Persekutuan v. Tenaga Nasional Berhad
-
Who can sue
The P must
have some interest in the land
that is affected
Who can be sued
Must be the
occupier who is in control
of the land
Defences
Statutory authority
Act of stranger
Consent
Default of the P
Act of God
:silhouette: Nadziratul Aspar