What is the test for liability in the case of Rylands v Fletcher v Fletcher?
Saskatchewan, Canada
The following excerpt is from Mihalchuk v. Hatke et ux, 1966 CanLII 374 (SK QB):
The rule in Rylands v. Fletcher is stated in Salmomd on Torts, 14th ed., p. 441, as follows: "The occupier of land who brings and keeps upon it anything likely to do damage if it escapes is bound at his peril to prevent its escape, and is liable for all the direct consequences of its escape, even if he has been guilty of no negligence."
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Can a defendant town be held liable under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What are the implications of the Rylands v Fletcher doctrine on the doctrine of strict liability? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the principle in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What are the elements of a cause of action under the principles in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the rule in Rylands v Fletcher apply? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for pure economic loss under the law under Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the Minister of Health and Social Care have any basis to strike the Statement of Claim in the context of bad faith allegations in paragraph 5 and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the definition of “escape” under the principle of Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for liability for damage caused to a person’s property by workmen who cause damage to the property? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What common law principles apply to occupiers' liability? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
