Is there any basis to interfere with a trial judge's conclusion that there is no cause of action based on the rule in Rylands v Fletcher?

Ontario, Canada


The following excerpt is from R. v. Henderson, 2008 CanLII 17305 (ON SCDC):

Accordingly, there is no basis to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion that there is no cause of action based on the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher. Interference with Riparian Rights

Other Questions


Can a motion judge interfere with the analysis and conclusion of a judge's assessment of the nature of the expression? (Ontario, Canada)
What are the implications of a motion judge's decisions regarding the restoration of an action to the trial list under r.48.11 and the dismissal of an Action for Delay pursuant to r.24.01? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for dismissing an action as prescribed on the basis that the cause of action had accrued more than 6 years before the Statement of Claim was issued? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there a cause of action in negligence, nuisance or under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher? (Ontario, Canada)
Does the Court of Appeal have any authority to interfere with a trial judge’s award of spousal support? (Ontario, Canada)
When will the court grant relief under the Fletcher doctrine under the Rylands v. Fletcher doctrine? (Ontario, Canada)
How has the trial judge considered the totality of evidence at trial for impaired driving? (Ontario, Canada)
In what circumstances will the appellate court interfere with a trial judge’s finding of fact? (Ontario, Canada)
In what circumstances will a judge in a sexual assault case be found to have objected to the words of the Judge at the trial of the accused? (Ontario, Canada)
Is the order of a trial judge dispensing with a jury during the course of the trial consistently treated as an exercise of the exercise of his discretion? (Ontario, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.