What constitutes a "single disastrous escape"?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from High Country Outfitters v. Pitt Meadows (City), 2012 BCPC 308 (CanLII):
Plainly, the case at bar involved no “single disastrous escape” but, rather, an insignificant (that is, non-disastrous) continuing escape which, by definition, lies outside the ambit of the Rylands v. Fletcher doctrine.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for the doctrine of Rylands v Fletcher when a single disastrous escape occurs over a continuous period of time? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does s. 50 of the Constitution apply to section 48 of the constitution? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for the admissibility of constitutional reference materials in the context of constitutional references? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an offer that does not comply with Rule 37 B constitute an offer to settle? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a vehicle provided by an employer as a crew bus constitute an extension of the employer's premises? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a parent escape child support obligations if their child can obtain a student loan? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the intention of the parties to use the funds received from an inheritance to purchase a house for themselves constitute a family asset? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the expectation of lengthy medical testimony and actuarial evidence about loss of future earnings constitute sufficient grounds to deny a trial by jury? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a single and dating relationship on a marriage-like relationship? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the requirements for a valid transfer before a trust can be constituted? (British Columbia, Canada)
