Ratio Decidendi
Foreseeability of damage of the relevant type is a prerequisite for liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher and in nuisance. The rule in Rylands v Fletcher is a sub-species of nuisance and should be developed in that context. Strict liability does not mean liability for unforeseeable consequences.
তথ্য
Eastern Counties Leather used a chemical solvent (PCE) in its tanning process for many years. Spillages of the solvent seeped through the concrete floor of the tannery, into the soil, and contaminated the underground water supply. Cambridge Water Company's borehole, 1.3 miles away, was contaminated. The water company sued for the cost of finding a new water source.
রায়ের সারসংক্ষেপ
The House of Lords held that Eastern Counties Leather was not liable. Lord Goff held that foreseeability of damage of the relevant type is a prerequisite for liability under Rylands v Fletcher, just as in nuisance and negligence. At the time the spillages occurred, the contamination of the water supply was not foreseeable — the pathway through the underground strata was not known. The case importantly confirmed that Rylands v Fletcher is a sub-species of private nuisance, not an independent cause of action based on general strict liability.
মূল উদ্ধৃতি
"It by no means follows that the defendant should be held liable for damage of a type which he could not reasonably foresee."
— Lord Goff
পরবর্তী ব্যবহার
Leading authority on the requirement of foreseeability in Rylands v Fletcher and nuisance claims.
Applied in Transco plc v Stockport MBC [2003] where the House of Lords further confirmed the restrictive approach to Rylands v Fletcher.