What is the test for strict liability in nuisance cases?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Chu v. Dawson, 1984 CanLII 264 (BC CA):
At issue on this appeal is the question of the applicability of the doctrine of strict liability; whether an owner, in circumstances such as obtained in this case, is strictly liable under the principles derived from Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), L.R. 3 H.L. 330, or alternatively is strictly liable in nuisance. There are also issues respecting quantum of damages.
"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
What is the case law on the re-opening of a plaintiff’s case in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is a nuisance and what is the test for liability for nuisance? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts treated nuisance claims in nuisance cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for liability in public nuisance cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a Workers’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal case, is there any case law that supports the argument that there is no case law in favour of a claim under the Employment Benefits Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law in which an appeal from a decision refusing approval of an infant settlement is successful? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the case law in favour of the Court of Appeal in the case of the Supreme Court of Canada's most senior judge in the matter of personal injury? (British Columbia, Canada)
What factors have been used to determine apportioning liability between parties in a motor vehicle accident case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the case law on the validity of evidence in a medical malpractice case? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there a moot case or moot case? (British Columbia, Canada)
