Does the rule in Rylands v Fletcher apply?

Saskatchewan, Canada


The following excerpt is from Denys v. Gabel, 2003 SKPC 97 (CanLII):

I therefore conclude that the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher does not apply, and that insofar as the rule is concerned the defendant is not liable for the consequences of the escaping fire. Alternate Ground of Liability -- Negligence

As noted in the chapter concerning liability for fire in Fleming on Torts, 8th edition (1992), "Failing Rylands v. Fletcher, the plaintiff is remitted to proving negligence". The plaintiffs' Statement of Claim alleges negligence, as well as strict liability.

Other Questions


Can a defendant town be held liable under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for liability in the case of Rylands v Fletcher v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What are the elements of a cause of action under the principles in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the principle in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for pure economic loss under the law under Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What are the implications of the Rylands v Fletcher doctrine on the doctrine of strict liability? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the Minister of Health and Social Care have any basis to strike the Statement of Claim in the context of bad faith allegations in paragraph 5 and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the definition of “escape” under the principle of Rylands v Fletcher? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the doctrine of frustration apply when it is alleged that a change in circumstances after the formation of a contract renders it physically or commercially impossible to fulfil the contract? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What are the principles to be applied in interpreting a will? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.