Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather plc
[1994] 2 AC 264
판결 이유
Liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher requires foreseeability of the type of damage. The escape of substances from land does not give rise to strict liability unless the type of harm was foreseeable at the time of the escape.
사실관계
Organochlorine solvents used in a tanning process seeped into the ground over many years and contaminated a borehole used by Cambridge Water for public supply.
판결 요약
The House of Lords held there was no liability because the contamination was not foreseeable at the time the spillages occurred. Lord Goff confirmed that foreseeability of the type of damage is a prerequisite of liability under Rylands v Fletcher.
주요 인용문
"Foreseeability of damage of the relevant type should be regarded as a prerequisite of liability in damages under the rule."
— Lord Goff
후속 처리
Key authority linking Rylands v Fletcher to foreseeability; also important for environmental liability.