Fletcher v. Rylands, L.R. 1 Ex. 265

Exchequer Chamber

1866

Chapter

14

Title

Common Law Strict Liability

Page

585

Topic

Abnormally Dangerous Activities

Quick Notes

Water reservoir floods coal mine.

Issue

o         What is the obligation which the law casts on a person who, like the Df - lawfully brings on his land something which though harmless whilst it remains there, will naturally do mischief it if escape out of his land.

Procedure

Trial

o         Pl received verdict in the Liverpool Summer Assizes

Appellant

o         Verdict was reversed in Exchequer

Exchequer

o         Pl bought error to the Exchequer Chamber. Reversed

Facts

Reason

Rules

o         Pl - Fletcher

o         Df - Rylands

What happened?

o         The Df - constructed a reservoir on top of the Pl - old coal mine.

o         After the Df - completed the reservoir the shafts gave way, and a large quantity of water flowed into the passages and shafts below, eventually flooding the coal workings of the Red House Colliery.

Procedural history

o         Pl received verdict in the Liverpool Summer Assizes.

o         Verdict was reversed in Exchequer.

o         Pl bought error to the Exchequer Chamber.

o         Exchequer chamber reversed.

Rule

o         The person who brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.

o         This is strict liability even if it is not his house.

Reasoning

o         The Df - selected competent engineers and contractors to make the reservoir, but there was a latent defect in the soil.

o         The Df - personally became aware of the existence of ancient shafts under the reservoir, but did not know they were still communicating with other workings.

Courts Reasoning

o        It seems but reasonable and just that the neighbor who has brought something on his own property (which was not naturally there), harmless to others so long as it is confined to his own property, but which he knows will be mischievous if it gets one his neighbors, should be obliged to make good the damage which ensues if he does not succeed in confining it to his own property.

Strict Liability (Prima Facie Case)

1. The existence of an absolute duty on the part of the Defendant to make safe;
2. Breach of that duty
3. The breach of the duty was the actual and proximate cause of the injury.
4. Damage to the Plaintiffs person or property.

Rules

Rule

o         The person who brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.

o         This is strict liability even if it is not his house.

Strict Liability (Prima Facie Case)

1.         The existence of an absolute duty on the part of the Defendant to make safe;

2.         Breach of that duty

3.         The breach of the duty was the actual and proximate cause of the injury.

4.         Damage to the Plaintiffs person or property.

Courts Reasoning

o        It seems but reasonable and just that the neighbor who has brought something on his own property (which was not naturally there), harmless to others so long as it is confined to his own property, but which he knows will be mischievous if it gets one his neighbors, should be obliged to make good the damage which ensues if he does not succeed in confining it to his own property.

Class Notes

o