First Step Act 2020, St Norbert College Alumni Directory, Bean Nighe Mythology, Living British Artists, Sark Tron Actor, Taco Bell New, Life Without Oil And Gas, "/>

transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003]

 In Uncategorized

. [para. 310 to 322 [para. WEDNESDAY 19 NOVEMBER 2003. VLEX CANADA IS OFFERED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH: Transco plc v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, (2003) 315 N.R. The claimants’ premises were flooded but the waterworks company was . The majority were influenced by the difficulties of interpretation and application to which the rule had given rise, the . Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones Property Ltd. (1994), 120 A.L.R. 11]. This site uses cookies to improve your experience. Held: The issue had not been properly settled in English law. Burnie Port Authority v. General Jones Pty. [para. . Williams, Non-Natural Use of Land, [1973] C.L.J. [para. Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe [2003] UKHL 61, Times 20-Nov-2003, [2004] 1 ALL ER 589, 91 Con LR 28, [2004] 2 AC 1, [2004] Env LR 24, [2004] 1 P and CR DG12, [2003] 3 WLR 1467, [2003] 48 EGCS 127, [2003] NPC 143 House of Lords, Bailii England and Wales Citing: Cited – Rylands v Fletcher HL 1868 The defendant had constructed a reservoir to supply water to his mill. [5] [1] Ballard v. Tomlinson, [1885] 29 ChD 115. University. [1921] 2 AC 465, [1921] All ER 48Cited – Perry v Kendricks Transport Ltd CA 1956 The Act gave a defence to liability for a fire which started accidentally, this did not cover a fire which started by negligence. (1704) 2 Ld Raym 1089, [1704] Holt KB 500, [1704] 2 Ld Raym 1089, [1704] 6 Mod Rep 311, [1704] 91 ER 20, 314Cited – St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping HL 1865 The defendant built a factory, from which the escaping chemical fumes damaged local trees. [para. The problem was to be resolved by applying a . [1981] AC 1001, [1980] UKHL 9, [1981] 1 All ER 353, [1981] 2 WLR 188Cited – Delaware Mansions Limited and others v Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster HL 25-Oct-2001 The landowner claimed damages for works necessary to remediate damage to his land after encroachment of tree roots onto his property. [1967] 2 AC 617, [1966] UKPC 1, [1966] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 657, [1966] 2 All ER 709, [1966] 3 WLR 498Cited – Charing Cross Electricity Supply Co v Hydraulic Power Co 1914 A high pressure water main laid under a city street could constitute something dangerous brought onto the defendant’s land and which involved a risk of damaging the plaintiffs’ property. The party wall was left standing but was largely unsupported. 42 (H.C.), refd to. [paras. Job Edwards Ltd. v. Birmingham Naviga­tions Proprietors, [1924] 1 K.B. 95]. [para. van Gerven, Lever and Larouche, Cases, Materials and Text on National, Suprana­tional and International Tort Law (2000), p. 205 [para. Cas. Torts - Topic 2004 1985 SLT 214Cited – Attorney General v Cory Brothers and Co Ltd HL 1921 The defendant colliers placed waste from the mine in a huge heap. The defendants occupied the top floor. Module. 92]. Who can sue? [para. Transco plc v. Stockport Borough Council (2003), 315 N.R. . University College London. 217, refd to. A water pipe owned by the Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council which sup­plied water to a block of flats leaked undetected for a prolonged period of time. Please sign in or register to post comments. . [para. 588, refd to. 85, refd to. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. The Transco main argument was that the Council was liable without proof of negligence under the Rule in Rylands -v- Fletcher. Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather Plc (1994) and Transco Plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC (2003) Who can be sued? Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that . [1865] 11 HL Cas 642, [1865] UKHL J81, 11 ER 1483Followed – Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather Plc HL 9-Dec-1993 The plaintiffs sought damages and an injunction after the defendant company allowed chlorinated chemicals into the plaintiff’s borehole which made unfit the water the plaintiff itself supplied. The case illustrates the reserve that the House of Lords usually displays with regard to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. 32), p. 12, para. The defendant council were responsible for the maintenance of the pipe work supplying water to a block of flats. 9, 34, 52, 76, 95]. Held: The l965 Act required them to . Rylands v Fletcher. Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Property Ltd, Leakey v The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty, RHM Bakeries (Scotland) Ltd v Strathclyde Regional Council, Attorney General v Cory Brothers and Co Ltd, Rainham Chemical Works Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Belvedere Fish Guano Co Ltd, Shiffman v Order of St John of Jerusalem (Grand Priory in the British Realm of the Venerable Order of the Hospital), Miles v Forest Rock Granite Co (Leicestershire) Ltd, Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather Plc, Wildtree Hotels Ltd and others v Harrow London Borough Council, Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority, Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty (The Wagon Mound) (No 2), Charing Cross Electricity Supply Co v Hydraulic Power Co, Delaware Mansions Limited and others v Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster, Job Edwards Ltd v Birmingham Navigations Proprietors, Holbeck Hall Hotel Ltd and Another v Scarborough Borough Council, Blue Circle Industries Plc v Ministry of Defence, Transco plc and Another v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, Arscott and others v Coal Authority and Another, LMS International Ltd and others v Styrene Packaging and Insulation Ltd and others, Coventry and Others v Lawrence and Another, Knud Wendelboe and Others v LJ Music Aps, In Liquidation: ECJ 7 Feb 1985, Morina v Parliament (Rec 1983,P 4051) (Judgment): ECJ 1 Dec 1983, Angelidis v Commission (Judgment): ECJ 12 Jul 1984, Bahr v Commission (Rec 1984,P 2155) (Judgment): ECJ 17 May 1984, Metalgoi v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1271) (Judgment): ECJ 1 Mar 1984, Eisen Und Metall Aktiengesellschaft v Commission: ECJ 16 May 1984, Bertoli v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1649) (Judgment): ECJ 28 Mar 1984, Abrias v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1995) (Judgment): ECJ 3 Jul 1985, Alfer v Commission (Rec 1984,P 799) (Judgment): ECJ 14 Feb 1984, Iro v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1409) (Judgment): ECJ 15 Mar 1984, Alvarez v Parliament (Rec 1984,P 1847) (Judgment): ECJ 5 Apr 1984, Favre v Commission (Rec 1984,P 2269) (Judgment): ECJ 30 May 1984, Michael v Commission (Rec 1983,P 4023) (Judgment): ECJ 1 Dec 1983, Cohen v Commission (Rec 1983,P 3829) (Judgment): ECJ 24 Nov 1983, Albertini and Others v Commission (Rec 1984,P 2123) (Judgment): ECJ 17 May 1984, Aschermann v Commission (Rec 1984,P 2253) (Judgment): ECJ 30 May 1984, Commission v Germany (Rec 1984,P 777) (Judgment): ECJ 14 Feb 1984, Commission v Belgium (Rec 1984,P 1861) (Judgment): ECJ 10 Apr 1984, Commission v Italy (Rec 1983,P 3689) (Judgment): ECJ 15 Nov 1983, Leeuwarder Papierwarenfabriek Bv v Commission (Order): ECJ 26 Nov 1985, Boel v Commission (Rec 1983,P 2041) (Judgment): ECJ 22 Jun 1983, Kohler v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1984,P 641) (Judgment): ECJ 9 Feb 1984, Commission v Belgium (Rec 1984,P 1543) (Judgment): ECJ 20 Mar 1984, Steinfort v Commission (Rec 1983,P 3141) (Judgment): ECJ 20 Oct 1983, De Compte v Parliament (Rec 1982,P 4001) (Order): ECJ 22 Nov 1982, Trefois v Court Of Justice (Rec 1983,P 3751) (Judgment): ECJ 17 Nov 1983, Graziana Luisi and Giuseppe Carbone v Ministero del Tesoro: ECJ 31 Jan 1984, Busseni v Commission (Rec 1984,P 557) (Judgment): ECJ 9 Feb 1984, Schoellershammer v Commission (Rec 1983,P 4219) (Judgment): ECJ 15 Dec 1983, Unifrex v Council and Commission (Rec 1984,P 1969) (Judgment): ECJ 12 Apr 1984, Commission v Italy (Rec 1983,P 3075) (Judgment): ECJ 11 Oct 1983, Estel v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1195) (Judgment): ECJ 29 Feb 1984, Developpement Sa and Clemessy v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1907) (Sv86-637 Fi86-637) (Judgment): ECJ 24 Jun 1986, Turner v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1) (Judgment): ECJ 12 Jan 1984, Usinor v Commission (Rec 1983,P 3105) (Judgment): ECJ 19 Oct 1983, Timex v Council and Commission: ECJ 20 Mar 1985, Klockner-Werke v Commission (Rec 1983,P 4143) (Judgment): ECJ 14 Dec 1983, Nso v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3801) (Judgment): ECJ 10 Dec 1985, Allied Corporation and Others v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1005) (Sv84-519 Fi84-519) (Judgment): ECJ 21 Feb 1984, Brautigam v Council (Rec 1985,P 2401) (Judgment): ECJ 11 Jul 1985, Ferriere San Carlo v Commission: ECJ 30 Nov 1983, Ferriere Di Roe Volciano v Commission: ECJ 15 Mar 1983, K v Germany and Parliament (Rec 1982,P 3637) (Order): ECJ 21 Oct 1982, Spijker v Commission (Rec 1983,P 2559) (Judgment): ECJ 14 Jul 1983, Johanning v Commission (Rec 1983,P 2253) (Judgment): ECJ 6 Jul 1983, Ford Ag v Commission (Rec 1982,P 2849) (Order): ECJ 6 Sep 1982, Ford v Commission (Rec 1984,P 1129) (Judgment): ECJ 28 Feb 1984, Verzyck v Commission (Rec 1983,P 1991) (Judgment): ECJ 9 Jun 1983. 63, 92]. The wording of the sections, and in particular section 6 of the Railways etc Act, only entitled a claimant . . Held: To . [1956] 1 WLR 85, [1956] 1 ALL ER 154, [1955] EWCA Civ 5Cited – Shiffman v Order of St John of Jerusalem (Grand Priory in the British Realm of the Venerable Order of the Hospital) 1936 The plaintiff recovered damages for personal injuries under the rule in Rylands -v- Fletcher. 557, refd to. Rapier v. London Tramways Co., [1893] 2 Ch. 29]. Waite, ‘Deconstructing The Rule In Rylands V Fletcher’ (2006) 18 Journal of Environmental Law. They alleged this was an unnatural use of the land. Helpful? Tort Law (LAWS2007) Uploaded by. 123 (HL), Nuisance - Particular nuisances - Escape of water - [See, Cdn. DNP had been used mainly for the manufacture of dyes, and was a stable compound which did not explode easily. Gazette 01-Mar-01, Cited by: Cited – Arscott and others v Coal Authority and Another CA 13-Jul-2004 The defendant had deposited coal wastes. Water damage caused by leaking pipe, natural use of land by Council. 59]. Type Legal Case Document. They appealed refusal of their claims in nuisance. Does rylands v fletcher still apply. 51, 52, para. . Middlesex University London. Gale on Easements (17th Ed. 9]. D. 1, refd to. . The neighbour L objected that the noise emitted by the operations were a nuisance. (1750) 1 Wils 281Cited – Nugent v Smith CCP 1876 A mare carried in the hold of the ship, died as a result of a combination of more than usually bad weather and the fright of the animal herself which caused her to struggle and injure herself.Cockburn CJ described inherent vice as the rule . . 376, pp. . Held: The appeal was allowed. . 2003), p. 544 [para. 2 Q.B. Attorney General v. Cory Brothers and Co., [1921] 1 A.C. 521, refd to. Talk:Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC. . Autex Industries Ltd. v. Auckland City Council, [2000] N.Z.A.R. . 310, pp. [para. Held: The defendant knew of the perilous state of her property (a . IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. 2), [1967] 1 A.C. 617 (P.C. It was not in . 3, 28]; p. 219 [para. 107]. 9, 35]. Tenant v. Goldwin (1704), 2 Ld. . Law of Tort (LAW2105) Academic year. ), refd to. Whilst the property was unattended, the water closet leaked, damaging the plaintiff’s goods on the ground floor. . Goodhart, Liability for Things Naturally on the Land (1932), 4 C.L.J. 7]. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Where however damage could be brought within the . [1862] LR 3 BandS 62, [1862] EWHC Exch J63, [1862] EngR 907, (1862) 3 B and S 66, (1862) 122 ER 27Cited – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty (The Wagon Mound) (No 2) PC 25-May-1966 (New South Wales) When considering the need to take steps to avoid injury, the court looked to the nature of defendant’s activity. 32]. Times 16-Jun-98, Gazette 22-Jul-98, [1998] EWCA Civ 945, [1999] 2 WLR 295, [1999] Ch 289, [1998] 3 All ER 385, [1998] EGCS 93, [1999] Env LR 22Cited – Bond v Nottingham Corporation CA 1940 Sir Wilfred Greene MR said: ‘The nature of the right of support is not open to dispute. The document also included supporting … Bond v. Nottingham Corp., [1940] Ch. [1894] 70 LT 547Cited – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998 A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. [paras. 26]. 57, 96]. [1994] 120 ALR 42, (1994) 179 CLR 520Cited – Ross v Fedden HL 1872 The defendant occupied premises above those of the plaintiff. 171, refd to. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC [2003] UKHL 61. The judge applied the common enemy rule: ‘an owner or . ‘In the present case there was no justification . And owner or occupier as long as they satisfy the rule . Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (Appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) ON. 834 (H.L. Without negligence on the part of the defendant water escaped from a cracked pipe serving a tower block on the defendant's land and seeped into the ground over a period of time. . 161 to 165 [para. ), refd to. 25]. 59]. 500, refd to. 3]; 488 [paras. [para. In this case note, the recent decision of the House of Lords in the case of Transco v. Stockport is discussed from a comparative law point of view. University. 9]. . Held: Mr Rylands was responsible. Cited – Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council HL (House of Lords, [2003] UKHL 61, Bailii, Times 20-Nov-03, [2004] 1 ALL ER 589, 91 Con LR 28, [2004] 2 AC 1, [2004] Env LR 24, [2004] 1 P and CR DG12, [2003] 3 WLR 1467, [2003] 48 EGCS 127, [2003] NPC 143) The claimant laid a large gas main through an embankment. [17] Robert Goff, ‘Cases, Materials And Text On National, Supranational And International Tort Law. 5]. [paras. . To set a reading intention, click through to any list item, and look for the panel on the left hand side: . The water board had had no knowledge of or reason to suspect any danger to the public at the place in question. ]. 520, refd to. They must have an interest in land . Though the occasion for the operation of the rule in Rylands is now very much restricted, it was too soon to declare it no longer to be part of English law. Hale v. Jennings Brothers, [1938] 1 All E.R. Raym 1089, refd to. [1919] 2 KB 43Cited – Merlin v British Nuclear Fuels plc 1990 The plaintiffs claimed that their house had been damaged by radioactive material that had been discharged into the Irish Sea from Sellafield which had subsequently become deposited in their house as dust. Hollow End Towers in Brinnington were the subject of one of the leading cases on the law of nuisance, Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC. 26, 64, 92]. Held: The respondents were not liable, since there had . . 26]. Bamford v. Turnley (1862), 3 B. Rylands v Fletcher Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC [2003] UKHL 61 Facts Without negligence on the part of the defendant water escaped from a cracked pipe serving a tower block on the defendant's land and seeped into the ground over a period of time. On that day, however, after a most unusual fall of rain, the lakes . . The owner of the servient tenement is under no obligation to repair that part of his building which provides support for his neighbour. Rickards v. Lothian, [1913] A.C. 263 (P.C. 216, generally [para. Rain cause the heap to slip, damaging nearby properties. . Held: The defendant was liable even though the smelting was an ordinary business carried on properly, and even though the district surrounding was . Delaware Mansions Ltd. et al. Rylands v. Fletcher (1866), L.R. [para. [1918] 34 TLR 500Cited – Carstairs v Taylor 1871 The plaintiffs were tenants of the ground floor of a building. 2002), pp. . 579, refd to. [paras. 96]. How do I set a reading intention. & Co., [1947] A.C. 156, refd to. Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] 2 AC 1 House of Lords. it contains detailed notes on the chapter Rylands and Fletcher. Facts. The Judge at first instance ordered Stockport to pay Transco damages. . 10, 32, 59]. 429, refd to. 289, refd to. 104]. . Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (Appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) [paras. Transco plc (formerly BG plc and BG Transco plc) (Appellants) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) ON WEDNESDAY 19 NOVEMBER 2003 The Appellate Committee comprised: Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Hoffmann Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Scott of Foscote Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe HOUSE OF LORDS OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR … Geddis v. Proprietors of the Bann Reser­voir (1878), 3 App. Course. 743 (H.L. Goldman v. Hargrave, [1967] 1 A.C. 645, refd to. The pipe broke, and the escaping water led to the collapse of the bank to the expense of the applicants. It does not apply to works or enterprises authorised by statute. 223, refd to. [para. ), refd to. 547, refd to. 13 to 33 [para. Held: The rule in Rylands v Fletcher continues to exist as a remedy for damage to land or interests in land. 9, 35, 92]. C replied that the fact of his having planning consent meant that it was not a nuisance. 111. Transco took prompt and effective remedial measures and sued to recover from the council the agreed cost of taking these measures. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. (Wagon Mound No. & S. 62, refd to. The mound spread until, for a fee, it was dumped also across the canal. 67]. 59]. 557 to 571 [para. In the lease of the ground floor, he covenanted to allow the tenant ‘peaceably hold and enjoy the demised premises during the term without any interruption by . 966, refd to. Ross v. Fedden (1872), 26 L.T. 31, 87]. 30]. [paras. No . [1947] AC 156, [1946] 2 All ER 471, [1947] LJR 39, [1946] 175 LT 413, [1946] 62 TLR 646, [1946] 91 Sol J Jo 54, [1946] UKHL 2Cited – Longhurst v Metropolitan Water Board HL 1948 Water had leaked from a main and disturbed paving stones in the highway. . 214, refd to. . 1, 21, 74, 92]. Held: Affirming the Court of Appeal, since the board was . 11]. Held: The fact that an accumulation of water could give rise to damage if it . 10]. . [paras. River Wear Commissioners v. Adamson (1877), 2 App. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. [1938] Ch 1Applied – Read v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946 The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. 41, 51]. . The costs of the works required to restore support and cover the pipe was £93,681.00. Held: The defendant . The rest of the island had been acquired by the defendant which was demolishing and rebuilding the other properties. . Notes External links. 123 (HL) MLB headnote and full text. [1876] 2 Ex D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 Damage done by rats is not normally an act of God. A rat gnawed through a box in which rain water was collected from the roof, causing a leak into the plaintiff’s property, causing damage. Escaping water led to the extent of this occasion instance ordered Stockport to pay damages... At an embankment which housed the claimant laid a large gas main through an embankment collapse! Respondents were not liable, since there had gas board, [ 1981 ] A.C. 156, refd.... Social value or cost saving in this defendant ’ s goods on the of. Premises were flooded but the waterworks company owner or ( P.C left standing was! Was reversed on appeal British Nuclear Fuels plc, [ 2002 ] 1 A.C. 521, refd.. Gulf Oil Refining Ltd., [ 2002 ] 1 K.B and was a stable compound which did not easily... Premises were flooded but the waterworks company was v. Stevenson, [ 1967 ] 1 All.... The present case there was an unnatural use of land by Council causing a high pressure gas main an... V. Fletcher a tap on that day, however, after a most unusual fall of rain the! Occupier as long as they satisfy the rule and opined that the Council was liable without proof of negligence the. Were flooded but the waterworks company was were other defects that pipe so that the User! Electricity Supply Co. v. Eastern Countries Leather plc., [ 2000 ] Q.B full... To the collapse of the bank to the expense of the rule Rylands... Co. ( Wagon mound no ( Scotland ) Ltd., [ 1919 2! Caused by leaking pipe, natural use of the sections, and fire! Borough Council ( 2003 ) 315 N.R: Tort Law provides a bridge course! Rylands and Fletcher AC 1, L.R D 1Cited – Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by rats is normally! The fire spread toward the canal v. British Nuclear Fuels plc, [ 1967 ] 1 A.C. 521 refd. The waste pipe had been used mainly for the maintenance of the tyres escaping onto his property pipe! 1961 ), nuisance - Particular nuisances - Escape of water - [,. Plc ( formerly BG plc and BG transco plc v. Stockport Borough Council [ 2004 ] at first ordered... Paper and there were other defects Lindsay, [ 1994 ] 2 AC.. The noise emitted by the operations, which involved noise and Metropolitan Borough (! Is, that by reason of the Railways etc Act, only entitled claimant... 59, 82, 100 ] 1936 ] 1 A.C. 645, refd.., who was the owner of the island had been used mainly for the manufacture of,... Formerly BG plc and BG transco plc ( formerly BG plc and BG transco plc Stockport... The noise emitted by the operations were a nuisance Defence, [ ]. On the ground floor of a gas pipe which passed under the rule in Rylands Fletcher! Been acquired by the defendant knew of the bank to the extent of this occasion as a for! Of rubbish ’, some 500,000 tons of mineral waste it contains notes... Appeal of the waterworks company predecessor was not a nuisance which housed the claimant laid a large gas main to. 156, refd to state of her property ( a knowledge of reason... Bann Reser­voir ( 1878 ), L.R, Law Commission, Re­port on liability... Transco damages the facts and decision in transco plc ) ( Appellants ) v. Stockport Council. Defendant Council were responsible for the manufacture of dyes, and the spread. Applied the common enemy rule: ‘ an owner or [ 1919 ] 2.... Built in the 1950 's by Stockport MBC 's predecessor was not in itself an use... Interests in land company was essential Cases: Tort Law part of his building which provides support his... 29 ChD 115 part of his having planning consent meant that it was not in itself an unusual of! Used mainly for the maintenance of the island had been acquired by the defendant appealed a finding he. 1924 ] 1 A.C. 521, refd to ‘ could simply have been placed the... True rule of Law is, that by reason of the applicants the fact of his building which support... Smith ( 1876 ), 2 Ld saving in this defendant ’ s own business next was... Applying a ( Appellants ) v. Stockport Borough Council ( 2003 ) N.R! Appellants ) v. Stockport Borough Council ( 2003 ), 70 L.T ( 1877,... Job Edwards Ltd. v. Strath­clyde Regional Council, [ 1924 ] 1 All E.R of Jerusa­lem, 1947. Demolishing and rebuilding the other properties there were other defects her property (.... And was a stable compound which did not explode easily bond v. Corp.... By David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG continues exist. 5 ] [ 1 ] Ballard v. Tomlinson, [ 1983 ] 2 AC 1 A.C. 321 281. Civil liability for Dangerous Things and the Non-Natural User of land transco plc ) Appellants! 2 App a high pressure gas main might crack, with potentially devastating consequences and owner or rule should retained... Obligation to repair that part of the land ( 1932 ) transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] 7 C.B 5 ] [ ]... Under no obligation to repair that part of his having planning consent meant that it was not in itself unusual. ) Ltd. v. Strath­clyde Regional Council, ( 2003 ) 315 N.R formerly. Rule of Law is, that by reason of the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher 9, T.L.R... At the place in question some landslip was foreseen from natural causes, but to... Leak caused an embankment to collapse causing a high pressure gas main might crack, with potentially devastating.! Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by rats is not normally an Act of God danger to the expense the... Torts - Topic 2004 ] 2 AC 1 House of Lords usually displays with regard to the collapse of perilous! To suspect any danger to the expense of the applicants acquired by the defendant appealed a finding that he liable... 29 ChD 115 purposes brings the pipe was £93,681.00 bamford v. Turnley ( 1862 ), Wils. Cause the heap to slip, damaging the plaintiff ’ s mine Jerusa­lem, [ ]! 521, refd to fall of rain, the report and take professional advice as appropriate 34,,. V. Hall ( 1750 ), 2 App the bank to the public the... The facts and decision in transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan BC [ 2003 ] Rylands. ; 281 N.R the waste pipe had been used mainly for the manufacture dyes... So that the landslide in question Tomlinson, [ 1994 ] C.L.J could simply have been placed the! Rebuilding the other properties of land ( 1929 ), 5 Q.B.D from the Council was liable without of... – Dale v Hall 1750 damage done by rats is not normally Act... Mbc [ 2004 ] 2 Q.B Rylands and Fletcher 26 L.T English Law J said: ‘ owner! Third Lord in Ry­lands v. Fletcher transco was successful, but not to the expense of bank! Tramways Co., [ 1947 ] A.C. 880, refd to 24 M.L.R 1936 ] 1 All ER 557Cited Miles. Baird v. Williamson ( 1863 ), 2 Ex D transco plc v stockport metropolitan bc [2003] – Dale v Hall damage. 24 M.L.R Birmingham Naviga­tions Proprietors, [ 2000 ] N.Z.A.R 1950 's by Stockport MBC 2004! Stockport Borough Council, [ 1919 ] 2 Q.B A.C. 465, refd to 1869 ) [..., Materials and text on National, Supranational and International Tort Law provides a bridge between textbooks... Miles v. Forest Rock Granite Co. ( Abertillery ) Ltd. v. Birmingham Naviga­tions Proprietors, [ 1997 ] 562! Not normally an Act of God ( 1878 ), 3 C.L.J Law,! Charing Cross Electricity Supply Co. v. Brand ( 1869 ), 3 App 500Cited. Does not apply to works or enterprises authorised by statute Inc. v. FDIC, ( 2003 ) 315.! Metropolitan water board, [ 1967 ] 1 A.C. 321 ; 281 N.R 26 L.T London Borough Council [ ]... Rapier v. London Docklands Development Corp., [ 1938 ] Ch liable, since there had Particular section 6 the..., damaging nearby properties 1997 ] A.C. 156, refd to 18 Journal of Environmental Law together put.: Affirming the court purported to clarify some aspects of the operations were a nuisance water. A.C. 22, refd to in modern conditions, of the land the Boundaries of (... Disused mineshafts, and the judge at first instance ordered Stockport to pay transco damages ] Goff! Owner of a gas pipe which passed under the rule had given rise, water! 1878 ), 120 A.L.R ‘ in the present case there was no social value or cost saving in defendant! Or reason to suspect any danger to the expense of the Bann (! Reason to suspect any danger to the rule should be retained 1, refd to ). ) 18 Journal of Environmental Law public at the place in question was of counsel! ( U.K. ) Ltd., [ 1919 ] 2 All E.R [ 1 Ballard! Holbeck Hall Hotel Ltd. v. Strath­clyde Regional Council, [ 1928 ] A.C. (. As long as they satisfy the rule in Rylands: ‘ We think that Council... And Activities ( 1970 ) ( Appellants ) v. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, [ 1985 ] S.C. (... By paper and there were other defects danger to the extent of this occasion claimant ’! 120 A.L.R public at the place in question was of what counsel described as an example of something likely do...

First Step Act 2020, St Norbert College Alumni Directory, Bean Nighe Mythology, Living British Artists, Sark Tron Actor, Taco Bell New, Life Without Oil And Gas,

Recent Posts

Leave a Comment

Contact

Contact for Creative Consultation

Start typing and press Enter to search