1-20 of 339 Results  for:

Clear all

Chapter

This chapter first looks at the idea of there being a form of strict liability for the escape of things brought onto and kept on land, arising from the case of Rylands v Fletcher. It continues by looking at the concept of ‘adopting a nuisance’; that is, allowing a nuisance on land to continue or failing to remove a natural hazard on land that ought to have been removed or been attended to, for example in order to prevent a one-off escape. Cases in this area have led to the existence of a ‘measured duty of care’, seemingly bringing the land torts closer to negligence.

Chapter

This chapter first looks at the idea of there being a form of strict liability for the escape of things brought onto and kept on land, arising from the case of Rylands v Fletcher. It continues by looking at the concept of ‘adopting a nuisance’; that is, allowing a nuisance on land to continue or failing to remove a natural hazard on land that ought to have been removed or been attended to, for example in order to prevent a one-off escape. Cases in this area have led to the existence of a ‘measured duty of care’, seemingly bringing the land torts closer to negligence.

Chapter

This chapter examines the rule from Rylands v Fletcher [1868]. The rule holds that where there has been an escape of a dangerous thing in the course of a non-natural use of land, the occupier of that land is liable for the damage to another caused as a result of the escape, irrespective of fault. The rule today is best understood through a trilogy of cases: Rylands v Fletcher, Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] and Transco v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004]. The development of the rule has led to an increased overlap with ideas from nuisance and negligence.

Chapter

This chapter examines the rule from Rylands v Fletcher [1868]. The rule holds that where there has been an escape of a dangerous thing in the course of a non-natural use of land, the occupier of that land is liable for the damage to another caused as a result of the escape, irrespective of fault. The rule today is best understood through a trilogy of cases: Rylands v Fletcher, Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] and Transco v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004]. The development of the rule has led to an increased overlap with ideas from nuisance and negligence.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] 2 AC 572. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] 2 AC 572. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

This chapter examines breach of duty in negligence. It discusses the factors that the court considers in determining whether the defendant is in breach of his duty of care to the claimant. These include the foreseeability of harm to the claimant, the appropriate standard of care owed by the defendant to the claimant, and the conduct of the defendant in comparison to the expected standard of care. This chapter suggests that the question of whether the defendant has breached a duty of care is a mixed one of law and fact and that the standard of care required of the defendant is an exclusively legal construct and based on the standard of a hypothetical reasonable person.