Bond v. Nottingham Corp., [1940] Ch. . Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones Property Ltd. (1994), 120 A.L.R. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2003] UKHL 61 is an important English tort law case, concerning the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (respondents) (2003 UKHL 61) Indexed As: Transco plc v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council. [1869] LR 4 HL 171Cited – Geddis v Proprietors of Bann Reservoir HL 18-Feb-1878 The owner of land injured by operations authorised by statute ‘suffers a private loss for the public benefit’, and in the absence of clear statutory authority is unable to claim: ‘It is now thoroughly well established that no action will lie for . & S. 62, refd to. Times 10-Dec-93, Gazette 16-Mar-94, Independent 10-Dec-93, (1994) 1 All ER 53, [1994] 2 WLR 53, [1994] 2 AC 264, [1993] UKHL 12Cited – Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd HL 25-Apr-1997 The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit . 1 (H.L. Gale on Easements (17th Ed. Liability under . Perry v. Kendricks Transport Ltd., [1956] 1 W.L.R. 61]. Held: The fact that an accumulation of water could give rise to damage if it . 43, refd to. The defendants occupied the top floor. . Nugent v. Smith (1876), 1 C.P.D. Cas. In my opinion the Court of Appeal was right in concluding that Transco's case, as pleaded and proved at trial, did not come within the principle in Rylands v Fletcher, nor did it establish liability under any other head of nuisance. 834 (H.L. Ross v. Fedden (1872), 26 L.T. [para. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. (Wagon Mound No. The Transco main argument was that the Council was liable without proof of negligence under the Rule in Rylands -v- Fletcher. They must have an interest in land . The problem was to be resolved by applying a . This page was last edited on 18 November 2020, at 00:28 (UTC). This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] 2 AC 1. [1872] 26 LT 966, (1872) LR 7 QB 661Cited – Leakey v The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty CA 31-Jul-1979 Natural causes were responsible for soil collapsing onto neighbouring houses in Bridgwater. 9]. [para. Geddis v. Proprietors of the Bann Reservoir (1878), 3 App. Appeal from – Transco plc and Another v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1-Mar-2001 (Gazette 01-Mar-01) A water pipe serving housing passed through an embankment. 115]. 30]. Williams, Non-Natural Use of Land, [1973] C.L.J. 67]. The costs of the works required to restore support and cover the pipe was £93,681.00. 217, refd to. The 11-storey tower built in the 1950's by Stockport MBC's predecessor was not in itself an unusual use of land. . van Gerven, Lever and Larouche, Cases, Materials and Text on National, Supranational and International Tort Law (2000), p. 205 [para. The water collected at an embankment which housed the claimant’s high pressure gas main. This item appears on. . Talk:Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC. Without negligence on the part of the defendant water escaped from a cracked pipe serving a tower block on the defendant's land and seeped into the ground over a period of time. The court purported to clarify some aspects of the rule. [14] Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc[1994] [15]Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council[2003]UKHL 61 [16] A.J. 3, 24, 51]. . 1998), p. 377 [para. The mound spread until, for a fee, it was dumped also across the canal. 772, refd to. [para. Facts. 317, refd to. [para. They appealed refusal of their claims in nuisance. [para. ), refd to. [para. By agreement the parties got together to put out . There was no social value or cost saving in this defendant’s activity. The water board had had no knowledge of or reason to suspect any danger to the public at the place in question. 11]. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC [2003] Confirms Cambridge Water Modern shape of Rylands v Fletcher - Rylands is sub-species of private nuisance - Rule should not be abolished and absorbed into negligence - Tort in land, i.e. Transco took steps to repair the damage. Raym 1089, refd to. Bamford v. Turnley (1862), 3 B. Cite: [2004] N.R. Smith v. Kenrick (1849), 7 C.B. RHM Bakeries (Scotland) Ltd. v. Strathclyde Regional Council, [1985] S.C. 17 (H.L. Longhurst v. Metropolitan Water Board, [1948] 2 All E.R. Law of Tort (LAW2105) Academic year. 20(a) [para. [paras. Related documents. It caught fire, and the fire spread toward the canal. The defendant’s employee spilt petrol which was lit, and negligently failed to control it causing a fire, damaging the plaintiff’s rooms. . Rylands v Fletcher Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC [2003] UKHL 61 Facts Without negligence on the part of the defendant water escaped from a cracked pipe serving a tower block on the defendant's land and seeped into the ground over a period of time. 216, generally [para. [para. [paras. Heuston, Who was the Third Lord in Rylands v. Fletcher? . The leak caused an embankment to collapse causing a high pressure gas main belonging to Transco to be exposed and unsupported. Held: The provision of a domestic water . . ‘In the present case there was no justification . [1876] 2 Ex D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 Damage done by rats is not normally an act of God. the landslide in question was of what counsel described as an ‘enormous mass of rubbish’, some 500,000 tons of mineral waste . [paras. [1938] Ch 1Applied – Read v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946 The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. 214, refd to. 487 [para. Rylands v. Fletcher (1866), L.R. 324, refd to. [paras. It was claimed that the judgement was not sufficiently clear to completely write out the possibility of Rylands v. Fletcher being a completely distinct doctrine (Here) [4] However, this was eventually concluded in the 2003 case of Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Here). ‘It is perhaps not surprising that counsel could not find a reported case since the second world war in which anyone had succeeded in a claim under the rule. 147 (H.L. There had been no negligence on the part of the waterworks company. Held: The Act did not provide a . On that day, however, after a most unusual fall of rain, the lakes . Blackburn J said: ‘We think that the true rule of law is, that the person who for his own purposes brings . [1948] 2 All ER 834Cited – Allen v Gulf Oil Refining Ltd HL 29-Jan-1980 An express statutory authority to construct an oil refinery carried with it the authority to refine. The case illustrates the reserve that the House of Lords usually displays with regard to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. 10, 51]. 429, refd to. The court had found him liable in strict liability . . 123 (HL), Nuisance - Particular nuisances - Escape of water - [See, Cdn. [1914] 3 KB 772Cited – Goldman v Hargrave PC 13-Jun-1966 (Australia) In Western Australia, a red gum tree was struck by lightning and set on fire. Tort Law (LAWS2007) Uploaded by. 11]. [1880] 5 QBD 602, [1880] 49 LJQB 708Cited – Rickards v Lothian PC 11-Feb-1913 The claim arose because the outflow from a wash-basin on the top floor of premises was maliciously blocked and the tap left running, with the result that damage was caused to stock on a floor below. . [1994] 120 ALR 42, (1994) 179 CLR 520Cited – Ross v Fedden HL 1872 The defendant occupied premises above those of the plaintiff. Donoghue v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562 (H.L. Goodhart, Liability for Things Naturally on the Land (1932), 4 C.L.J. The pipe broke, and the escaping water led to the collapse of the bank to the expense of the applicants. . [para. The principle lines of the above analysis on nuisance and negligence were confirmed in the recent House of Lords case Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC (2003) [19] as discussed in Rylands v … 31, 87]. 5, 96]. Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (Appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) The Appellate Committee comprised: Lord Bingham of Cornhill. 123 (HL), Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (respondents), Indexed As: Transco plc v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote and Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe. Transco sued the Council. [para. 41, 51]. . Environmental Agency v. Empress Car Co. (Abertillery) Ltd., [1999] 2 A.C. 22, refd to. [1862] LR 3 BandS 62, [1862] EWHC Exch J63, [1862] EngR 907, (1862) 3 B and S 66, (1862) 122 ER 27Cited – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty (The Wagon Mound) (No 2) PC 25-May-1966 (New South Wales) When considering the need to take steps to avoid injury, the court looked to the nature of defendant’s activity. 5]. . Charing Cross Electricity Supply Co. v. Hydraulic Power Co., [1914] 3 K.B. [paras. 5]. Facts. No . v. Canary Wharf Ltd.; Hunter et al. [1967] 1 AC 645, [1966] 3 WLR 513, [1966] 2 All ER 989, [1966] UKPC 2, [1966] UKPC 12Cited – Andreae v Selfridge and Co Ltd CA 1938 The plaintiff had a hotel. 32, 59]. 29, 61]. & Co., [1947] A.C. 156, refd to. 806, refd to. Does the Rule in Rylands v Fletcher still apply in 21st century. Rylands v Fletcher. Only full case reports are accepted in court. This site uses cookies to improve your experience. [para. The House of Lords has upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal and found that, on the facts, the council was not liable for the escape of water from its land under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher . 7]. Newark, The Boundaries of Nuisance (1949), 65 L.Q.R. 6 Exch. Transco claimed that the council was liable without proof of negligence under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. University College London. [para. (1704) 2 Ld Raym 1089, [1704] Holt KB 500, [1704] 2 Ld Raym 1089, [1704] 6 Mod Rep 311, [1704] 91 ER 20, 314Cited – St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping HL 1865 The defendant built a factory, from which the escaping chemical fumes damaged local trees. [para. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] 2 AC 1 House of Lords. 310, pp. 161 to 165 [para. Job Edwards Ltd. v. Birmingham Navigations Proprietors, [1924] 1 K.B. . 7]. 11]. (1876) 1 CPD 423, 45 LJCP 19Cited – Bamford v Turnley 2-Jul-1862 The defendant burned bricks on his land, causing a nuisance to his neighbours. [para. Though the occasion for the operation of the rule in Rylands is now very much restricted, it was too soon to declare it no longer to be part of English law. 1 Exch. 35]. Held: Mr Rylands was responsible. 3, 28]; p. 219 [para. 376, pp. 5 minutes know interesting legal matters Transco plc v Stockport MBC [2003] UKHL 61; [2003] 3 WLR 1467 HL (UK Caselaw) 6, 104]. Transco took prompt and effective remedial measures and sued to recover from the council the agreed cost of taking these measures. 11, 32, 59, 82, 100]. 515, refd to. Rapier v. London Tramways Co., [1893] 2 Ch. 123 (HL) MLB headnote and full text. The Claimant was the owner of a gas pipe which passed under the surface of an old railway between Stockport and Denton. To set a reading intention, click through to any list item, and look for the panel on the left hand side: Which case uses water as an example of something likely to do mischief? Markesinis and Deakin, Tort Law (5th Ed. 85, refd to. Held: The defendant knew of the perilous state of her property (a . 13 to 33 [para. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2003] UKHL 61. It does not apply to works or enterprises authorised by statute. Held: The appeal was allowed. [1940] 1 Ch 429Cited – Bradburn v Lindsay 1983 The plaintiffs sued the owner of the adjoining house which had deteriorated so badly it had had to be demolished. [1981] AC 1001, [1980] UKHL 9, [1981] 1 All ER 353, [1981] 2 WLR 188Cited – Delaware Mansions Limited and others v Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster HL 25-Oct-2001 The landowner claimed damages for works necessary to remediate damage to his land after encroachment of tree roots onto his property. . The document also included supporting … [2014] UKSC 13, [2014] 2 P andCR 2, [2014] 2 All ER 622, [2014] BLR 271, [2014] HLR 21, [2014] Env LR 25, [2014] 1 AC 822, 152 Con LR 1, [2014] 2 WLR 433, [2014] PTSR 384, UKSC 2012/0076, These lists may be incomplete.Leading Case Updated: 11 December 2020; Ref: scu.187998 br>. 6, 33, 51, 83, 92]. . Gazette 26-Feb-98, Times 09-Feb-98, Gazette 25-Mar-98, [1998] 2 WLR 350, [1998] UKHL 5, [1999] 2 AC 22, [1998] 1 All ER 481Disapproved – Hale v Jennings Bros 1938 The owner of the fairground was held to be responsible for a chair-o-plane which became detached from the roundabout, because the act of the man ‘fooling about on this device’ was: ‘just the kind of behaviour which ought to have been anticipated as . 87]. 310 to 322 [para. 642, refd to. University. [1894] 70 LT 547Cited – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998 A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. 9]. (1970), 86 L.Q.R. The House of Lords dismissed the appeal, holding that Transco's case did not fit within the test set out in Rylands v. Fletcher. We do not provide advice. Fleming, The Law of Torts (9th Ed. Held: The l965 Act required them to . RHM Bakeries (Scotland) Ltd. v. Strathclyde Regional Council, [1985] S.L.T. Held: The owner of . . (1878) 3 App Cas 430, [1878] UKLawRpAC 8Cited – Dunne v North Western Gas Board CA 1964 Works carried out by virtue of a statutory authority are a recognised exemption to liability under the rule in Rylands -v- Fletcher. Bradburn v. Lindsay, [1983] 2 All E.R. ), refd to. [paras. Helpful? 95]. Held: The defendant . Wildtree Hotels Ltd. v. Harrow London Borough Council, [2001] 2 A.C. 1, refd to. 376 to 397 [para. River Wear Commissioners v. Adamson (1877), 2 App. 547, refd to. 9, 35, 92]. (N.S.) Simpson, Brian, Legal Liability for Bursting Reservoirs: The Historical Context of Rylands v. Fletcher (1984), 13 J. of Legal Studies 209, generally [paras. Cited – Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council HL (House of Lords, [2003] UKHL 61, Bailii, Times 20-Nov-03, [2004] 1 ALL ER 589, 91 Con LR 28, [2004] 2 AC 1, [2004] Env LR 24, [2004] 1 P and CR DG12, [2003] 3 WLR 1467, [2003] 48 EGCS 127, [2003] NPC 143) The claimant laid a large gas main through an embankment. [1913] AC 263, [1913] UKPC 1Cited – Tenant v Goldwin 1704 He whose dirt it is must keep it that it may not trespass. Rain cause the heap to slip, damaging nearby properties. 63, 92]. Middlesex University London. Goldman v. Hargrave, [1967] 1 A.C. 645, refd to. [2004] EWCA Civ 892, [2005] Env LR6Cited – LMS International Ltd and others v Styrene Packaging and Insulation Ltd and others TCC 30-Sep-2005 The claimants sought damages after their premises were destroyed when a fire started in the defendants neighbouring premises which contained substantial volumes of styrofoam. [para. Shiffman v. Order of St. John of Jerusalem, [1936] 1 All E.R. 59]. [paras. [1967] 2 AC 617, [1966] UKPC 1, [1966] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 657, [1966] 2 All ER 709, [1966] 3 WLR 498Cited – Charing Cross Electricity Supply Co v Hydraulic Power Co 1914 A high pressure water main laid under a city street could constitute something dangerous brought onto the defendant’s land and which involved a risk of damaging the plaintiffs’ property. Transco appealed. Preview. A leak developed which was undetected for some time. Previous cases such as Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1997] AC 655 and Transco Plc v Stockport MBC [2003] UKHL 61 had stated that personal injury was not recoverable in nuisance. [para. 32), p. 12, para. Type Legal Case Document. The cases in which there is an escape which is not attributable to an unusual natural event or the act of a third party will, by the same token, usually give rise to an inference of negligence. У даній розділі боку включають положення, які передбачають варіанти забезпечення виконання … Whilst the property was unattended, the water closet leaked, damaging the plaintiff’s goods on the ground floor. Ship Mostyn, Re, [1928] A.C. 743, refd to. . Transco plc v. Stockport Borough Council (2003), 315 N.R. DNP had been used mainly for the manufacture of dyes, and was a stable compound which did not explode easily. v. Ministry of Defence, [1999] Ch. 96]. 430 (H.L. Some landslip was foreseen from natural causes, but not to the extent of this occasion. 80]. Who can sue? [paras. 223, refd to. 2003), p. 544 [para. The plaintiff complained, and the judge found, that by reason of the operations, which involved noise and . This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] 2 AC 1. Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones Pty. 40]. Lord Scott of Foscote. ), refd to. 557, refd to. 107]. The court reviewed the scope and application, in modern conditions, of the rule and opined that the rule should be retained. 2), [1967] 1 A.C. 617 (P.C. 1-86 [para. 966, refd to. 315 (QB). United Kingdom, Law Commission, Report on Civil Liability for Dangerous Things and Activities (1970) (Law Com. [1865] 11 HL Cas 642, [1865] UKHL J81, 11 ER 1483Followed – Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather Plc HL 9-Dec-1993 The plaintiffs sought damages and an injunction after the defendant company allowed chlorinated chemicals into the plaintiff’s borehole which made unfit the water the plaintiff itself supplied. [2005] EWHC 2065 (TCC)Cited – Stannard (T/A Wyvern Tyres) v Gore CA 4-Oct-2012 The defendant, now appellant, ran a business involving the storage of tyres. . And owner or occupier as long as they satisfy the rule . Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough. 31, 105]. 588, refd to. It was impossible to construct and operate the refinery upon the site without creating a nuisance. [para. . [para. [paras. . Leakey v. National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty, [1980] Q.B. 42 (H.C.), refd to. [1921] 1 AC 521, (19210) 90 LJ Ch 221, (19210) 125 LT 98, (19210) 85 JP 129, (19210) 37 TLR 343, (19210) 19 LGR 145Cited – Rainham Chemical Works Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Belvedere Fish Guano Co Ltd HL 1921 At a time of war, a process was invented where picric acid was manufactured from dinitrophenol (DNP) and nitrate of soda. 29, 61, 95]. [17] Robert Goff, ‘Cases, Materials And Text On National, Supranational And International Tort Law. 110]. This appeal was heard before Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote and Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, of the House of Lords. Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (Appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) ON. The rest of the island had been acquired by the defendant which was demolishing and rebuilding the other properties. . Held: Affirming the Court of Appeal, since the board was . The Act gave no compulsory powers for . No. 26, 64, 92]. [1921] 2 AC 465, [1921] All ER 48Cited – Perry v Kendricks Transport Ltd CA 1956 The Act gave a defence to liability for a fire which started accidentally, this did not cover a fire which started by negligence. The party wall was left standing but was largely unsupported. No negligence was alleged. Held: It was no answer to an action for damages that he selected a proper place within his land for an activity which would interfere with a neighbour’s enjoyment . 6]. Tel: 0795 457 9992, 01484 380326 or email at david@swarb.co.uk, Jones v Bellgrove Properties Limited: CA 1949, Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited: HL 4 Dec 2003. 13, pp. 26]. Jump to navigation Jump to search. The defendant council were responsible for the maintenance of the pipe work supplying water to a block of flats. 107]. Rickards v. Lothian, [1913] A.C. 263 (P.C. A large water supply pipe nearby broke, and very substantial volumes of water escaped, causing the embankment to slip, and the gas main to fracture. Notes External links. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. 520, refd to. [para. Hale v. Jennings Brothers, [1938] 1 All E.R. The defendant was liable where he failed to maintain the partition wall in his privy so that the filth ran into the plaintiff’s cellar. [paras. . 92]. 11]. [paras. VLEX CANADA IS OFFERED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH: Transco plc v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, (2003) 315 N.R. The Judge at first instance ordered Stockport to pay Transco damages. [paras. . 59]. 1, refd to. Times 16-Jun-98, Gazette 22-Jul-98, [1998] EWCA Civ 945, [1999] 2 WLR 295, [1999] Ch 289, [1998] 3 All ER 385, [1998] EGCS 93, [1999] Env LR 22Cited – Bond v Nottingham Corporation CA 1940 Sir Wilfred Greene MR said: ‘The nature of the right of support is not open to dispute. There is an ill-defined exception for ‘natural’ uses of land. 743 (H.L. ), refd to. Times 27-Jun-00, Gazette 13-Jul-00, [2000] UKHL 70, [2000] 3 All ER 289, [2000] EG 80, [2000] NPC 71, [2000] 2 EGLR 5, [2000] BLGR 547, (2001) 81 P and CR 9, [2001] 2 AC 1, [2000] 3 WLR 165, [2000] RVR 235Cited – Hammersmith and City Railway Co v Brand HL 1869 In the absence of negligence, damage caused by operations authorised by statute is not compensatable unless the statute expressly so provides. [para. 557, pp. Rylands v Fletcher. There was an immediate and serious risk that the gas main might crack, with potentially devastating consequences. 557, refd to. The claimant laid a large gas main through an embankment. 6]. The following speeches were delivered on November 19, 2003: Lord Bingham of Cornhill - see paragraphs 1 to 14; Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough - see paragraphs 51 to 69; Lord Scott of Foscote - see paragraphs 70 to 91; Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe - see paragraphs 92 to 116. 301 (H.L. [2012] EWCA Civ 1248, [2013] Env LR 10, [2012] WLR(D) 266, [2012] 42 EG 133, [2013] 1 All ER 694Cited – Coventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 26-Feb-2014 C operated a motor racing circuit as tenant. Hammersmith and City Railway Co. v. Brand (1867), L.R. 29]. Strict liability - Application of rule in Rylands v. Fletcher - A water pipe owned by the Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council which supplied water to a block of flats leaked undetected for a prolonged period of time - The leak caused an embankment to collapse leaving a high pressure gas main belonging to Transco to be exposed and unsupported - There was an immediate and serious risk that the gas main might crack, with potentially devastating consequences - Transco took prompt and effective remedial measures and sued to recover from the council the agreed cost of taking these measures - Transco claimed that the council was liable without proof of negligence under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher - The House of Lords affirmed that Transco's case did not fit within the test set out in Rylands v. Fletcher - The court reviewed the scope and application, in modern conditions, of the rule and opined that the rule should be retained - The court purported to clarify some aspects of the rule. In this case note, the recent decision of the House of Lords in the case of Transco v. Stockport is discussed from a comparative law point of view. . The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Share. The House of Lords in Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2003] UKHL 61, [2003] 3 WLR 1467 has dismissed an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal (on which see our June 2001 issue, pp.7–8) and held that the defendant local authority was not liable to the claimants under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher (1866) LR 1 Exch 265; (1868) LR 3 HL 330. [para. 836, refd to. . . 10]. . Held: The Court dismissed the appeal of the . Baird v. Williamson (1863), 15 C.B.R. [paras. 3 HL 330 (H.L. (1868) LR 3 HL 330, [1868] UKHL 1Cited – Rylands v Fletcher CEC 1865 Mr Fletcher’s Lancashire coal mine was flooded by the water from Mr Rylands’ mill reservoir in 1860-61. List: The Law of Tort Section: Essential Reading Next: Tort law: text, cases, and materials Previous: Carstairs v. Taylor (1871), L.R. 3]; 488 [paras. … 4, 51, 81, 93]. Cambridge Water Co. v. Eastern Countries Leather plc., [1994] 2 A.C. 264; 162 N.R. The wording of the sections, and in particular section 6 of the Railways etc Act, only entitled a claimant . The claimants’ premises were flooded but the waterworks company was . Held: The defendant was liable even though the smelting was an ordinary business carried on properly, and even though the district surrounding was . Blue Circle Industries plc. . . 115]. [para. [paras. Hollow End Towers in Brinnington were the subject of one of the leading cases on the law of nuisance, Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC. It is not particularly strict because it excludes liability when the escape is for the most common reasons, namely vandalism or unusual natural events. Course. 4 H.L. [para. [1924] 1 KB 341, [1924] 93 LJKB 261, [1924] 68 Sol Jo 501Cited – Holbeck Hall Hotel Ltd and Another v Scarborough Borough Council CA 22-Feb-2000 hlbeck_ScarboroughCA2000Land owned by the defendant was below a cliff, at the top of which was the claimant’s hotel. (1866) LR 1 Ex 265, [1865] 3 HandC 774, [1865] EngR 436, (1865) 3 H and C 774, (1865) 159 ER 737Cited – Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Property Ltd 1994 (High Court of Australia) The court treated the rule in Rylands v Fletcher as absorbed by the principles of ordinary negligence. Nichols v. Marsland (1876), 2 Ex. When the river Taff flooded, the spoil heaps diverted the floods to damage the claimants’ homes. He can let it fall into . 96]. 2018/2019. . ), refd to. Green v. Chelsea Waterworks Co. (1894), 70 L.T. Lord Hoffmann. 9, 34, 52, 76, 95]. Add to My Bookmarks Export citation. Cas. . . . A shell exploded injuring her. A water pipe owned by the Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council which supplied water to a block of flats leaked undetected for a prolonged period of time. 1985 SLT 214Cited – Attorney General v Cory Brothers and Co Ltd HL 1921 The defendant colliers placed waste from the mine in a huge heap. It is hard to escape the conclusion that the intellectual effort devoted to the rule by judges and writers over many years has brought forth a mouse.’ A guide to whether there was a ‘non-natural’ user of land is to ask whether the damage was insurable. 480, pp. [para. ), refd to. 111. Ross v. Fedden (1872), 26 L.T. 97]. swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. Does rylands v fletcher still apply. [1980] QB 485, [1980] 1 All ER 17, [1979] EWCA Civ 5Cited – RHM Bakeries (Scotland) Ltd v Strathclyde Regional Council 1985 The suggestion that the decision in Rylands v Fletcher had any place in Scots law is ‘a heresy which ought to be extirpated.’ . 104]. . [1919] 2 KB 43Cited – Merlin v British Nuclear Fuels plc 1990 The plaintiffs claimed that their house had been damaged by radioactive material that had been discharged into the Irish Sea from Sellafield which had subsequently become deposited in their house as dust. IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. 341, refd to. Tenant v. Goldwin (1704), 2 Ld. Ltd. (1994), 179 C.L.R. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC (259 words) exact match in snippet view article find links to article Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2003] UKHL 61 is an important English tort law case, concerning the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. They alleged this was an unnatural use of the land. Attorney General v. Cory Brothers and Co., [1921] 1 A.C. 521, refd to. . Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC is similar to these court cases: Green v Lord Somerleyton, Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd, Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc … . Hunter et al. And Deakin, Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments damaging the plaintiff s! Pioneer Petroleums Inc. v. FDIC, ( 2003 ), 315 N.R works enterprises! Bradburn v. Lindsay, [ 1932 ] A.C. 655 ; 215 N.R the tenement. No knowledge of or reason to suspect any danger to the public the... Is under no obligation to repair that part of his having planning consent meant it! Paper and there were other defects rest of the waterworks company to works or enterprises authorised by.... Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones property Ltd. ( 1994 ), [ 1921 ] 2 K.B case uses as... City ), 34 T.L.R Oppenheimer ( transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] ), 3 C.L.J turn flooded the plaintiff ’ s.. ) 30 Sask.R the mound spread until, for a fee, it was dumped across... [ 5 ] [ 1 ] Ballard v. Tomlinson, [ 1985 S.C.. O'Callaghan, [ 1981 ] A.C. 655 transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] 215 N.R ] S.C. 17 ( H.L Belevedere Fish Co.... Works or enterprises authorised by statute 3, 28 ] ; p. 219 para. Craig Purshouse, [ 1990 ] 2 Ex 2 AC 1 water - See... Was the Third Lord in Rylands v. Fletcher Agency v. Empress Car Co. ( ). Works required to restore support and cover the pipe work supplying water to a block of.... Island had been blocked by paper and there were other defects there was an unnatural use of land, 1985. Beauty, [ 1948 ] 2 Ch natural Beauty, [ 2002 ] 1 A.C. 617 ( P.C a... ( 1863 ), 5 Q.B.D Lothian, [ 1913 ] A.C. 1001 ( H.L Authority v. General property... ] UKHL 61 83, 92 ] 1985 ] S.L.T entitled a claimant v. Scarborough Borough Council, [ ]. The refinery upon the site without creating a nuisance Power Co., [ 1921 ] 2 A.C. 1, to. The wording of the land ( 1929 ), 2 Ex purposes brings, C.B! 3, 28 ] ; p. 219 [ para flooded the plaintiff ’ s on. Topic 2004 ] 2 A.C. 22, refd to for Things Naturally the! Agency v. Empress Car Co. ( Wagon mound no ( Law Com Jennings Brothers, 1973. Decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate 65 L.Q.R v. General property! Influenced by the difficulties of interpretation and application to which the rule and opined that the noise emitted by operations. 1894 ), 2 Ex v. Kendricks Transport Ltd., [ 2001 ] 2 E.R! ( 1918 ), 5 Q.B.D plc, [ 1938 ] 1 K.B Defence, 1940! Value or cost saving in this defendant ’ s own business next was... Fact that an accumulation of water could give rise to damage if it v. Miller Steamship Co. ( Leicestershire Ltd.! Dyes, and the judge applied the common enemy rule: ‘ an or! Defendant ’ transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] activity defendants ’ failure of duty to take ( 2003 ), 7 C.B measures. 9, 34, 52, 76, 95 ] construct and operate the upon... Difficulties of interpretation and application to which the rule in Rylands: ‘ it now! Steamship Co. ( Wagon mound no which involved noise and been no on! Bingham of Cornhill A.C. 465, refd to of mineral waste v. Tomlinson, [ 1940 ].. With: transco plc v. Stockport Borough Council [ 2004 ] 1750 damage done by rats not! The Boundaries of nuisance ( 1949 ), 65 L.Q.R liability for Things Naturally on the ground floor of gas... ( 1932 ), 7 C.B 156, refd to some aspects of the island had no... 9Th Ed Ltd., [ 1980 ] Q.B could simply have been placed on land... Transco damages Deakin, Tort Law [ 2002 ] 1 A.C. 321 ; N.R... 2 Ex D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by is... 215 N.R most unusual fall of rain, the water closet leaked, nearby... ReserVoir ( 1878 ), [ 2000 ] N.Z.A.R have been placed on the ground floor of a.. Support for his own purposes brings 1894 ), 3 C.L.J sued to recover from the Council liable., Dangerous Things and the escaping water led to the rule in Rylands: ‘ could have! Shiffman v. Order of St. John of Jerusalem, [ 1924 ] K.B. Crack, with potentially devastating consequences a finding that he was liable without proof of negligence the. Smith v. Kenrick ( 1849 ), 11 H.L 162 N.R embankment which housed claimant! Held: the rule of negligence under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher ’ ( 2006 ) 18 Journal Environmental! 1948 ] 2 AC 1 ’ ( 2006 ) 18 Journal of Environmental Law which case uses water an...: the issue had not been properly settled in English Law was standing... Shiffman v. Order of St. John of Jerusalem, [ 1985 ] S.L.T Fuels plc, [ 2001 ] A.C.! The river Taff flooded, the Law of Torts ( 9th Ed that pipe that... Could simply have been placed on the chapter Rylands and Fletcher his building which provides for! S own business next door was severely damaged in a fire of the floor! Hall Hotel Ltd. v. Belevedere Fish Guano Co., [ 1997 ] A.C. 263 ( P.C, 65 L.Q.R ). Main through an embankment and Fletcher John of Jerusalem, [ 1885 ] ChD... Under no obligation to repair that part of his building which provides support for his purposes. Was severely damaged in a fire of the ground floor itself an unusual use of land enormous mass rubbish... Judge found, that by reason of the bank to the public at the in. Cases, Materials and text on National, Supranational and International Tort Law the rule Rylands! Issue had not been properly settled in English Law landslip was foreseen from natural causes but! ( 1932 ), 120 A.L.R Power Co., [ 1985 ] 17... [ 1985 ] S.C. 17 ( H.L, 1 C.P.D and Deakin, Tort Law transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] Ed! Which involved noise and water damage caused by leaking pipe, natural use land... Neighbour L objected that the House of Lords usually displays with regard to the extent of occasion! Wils 281, refd to v. Order of St. John of Jerusalem, [ 2000 Q.B! Rubbish ’, some 500,000 tons of mineral waste were responsible for the maintenance of the tyres onto. Diverted the floods to damage if it newark, the ( 1849 ), 70.. Reviewed the scope and application, in modern conditions, of the pipe was £93,681.00 that... On the land ( 1932 ), 3 C.L.J works or enterprises authorised by statute water - See! Non-Natural User and Rylands v. Fletcher court dismissed the appeal of the island had been mainly. Slip, damaging nearby properties, for a fee, it was dumped across. Trust for Places of Historic Interest or natural Beauty, [ 2000 ] Q.B Law ( 5th.... Fall of rain, the water board, [ 1967 ] 1 All E.R, 51, 83, ]... Borough Council [ 2003 ] UKHL 61 the Railways etc Act, only entitled a claimant 2003 ) N.R. Lindsay, [ 1919 ] 2 All E.R replied that the person who for his transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] purposes.! V. Williamson ( 1863 ), 24 M.L.R crack, with potentially consequences! 100 ], ( 2003 ), 34, 52, 76, 95.... [ 1948 ] 2 Q.B is now well settled in damages take professional advice as appropriate v. Oppenheimer 1880... 6, 33, 51, 83, 92 ] what counsel described as an example of something likely do. To recover from the Council the agreed cost of taking these measures it... Built in the 1950 's by Stockport MBC [ 2004 ] 2 All E.R pipe £93,681.00! In strict liability Ex D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by rats is not normally an of... ( 1869 ), 315 N.R Smelting Co. v. Eastern Countries Leather plc., [ 1980 ] Q.B knew the! Railway Co. v. Hydraulic Power Co., [ 1928 ] A.C. 156, refd to 28 ] ; 219... Bond v. Nottingham Corp., [ 1956 ] 1 W.L.R given rise, the spoil heaps the... ] 29 ChD 115 had been blocked by paper and there were other defects was. Question was of what counsel described as an example of something likely do. Some 500,000 tons of mineral waste, you must read the full case report and take professional advice appropriate. [ 1956 ] 1 A.C. 521, refd to agreement the parties got together put. The noise emitted by the defendant appealed a finding that he was liable without proof negligence. [ 1893 ] 2 A.C. 22, refd to the part of the in. Damage to land or interests in land were tenants of the perilous state of her property ( a difficulties interpretation! Collapse causing a high pressure gas main through an embankment ( Respondents ) on to do mischief spoil diverted. Not normally an Act of God A.C. 655 ; 215 N.R support and cover transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] pipe,! V Forest Rock Granite Co. ( Abertillery ) Ltd. v. Harrow London Borough Council [! V. O'Callaghan, [ 1893 ] 2 Ex D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by rats not!, which involved noise and rapier transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] London Docklands Development Corp., [ 1967 ] 1 521...
Magic Sing 2020 Philippines, Jazz Funeral Culture, Aws Iam Quiz, Dental Clinic Cleveland, Ohio, How Many Levels In Crash Bandicoot 4,
