Private nuisance and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher—common law liability for environmental harm

Published by a ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû Environment expert
Practice notes

Private nuisance and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher—common law liability for environmental harm

Published by a ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû Environment expert

Practice notes
imgtext

Private nuisance

Relevance of private nuisance in modern law

Notwithstanding the quite complex level of environmental regulation, private nuisance (along with other torts such as negligence and trespass) continues to play an important part in modern environmental law. This is unsurprising in a Common law jurisdiction where the judiciary has a central role in the constitution. Also, some environmental issues fall outside the regulatory regimes. For instance, the statutory nuisance regime under Part 3 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990) only covers those environmental nuisances listed in EPA 1990, s 79(1) but if the environmental harm has abated there could well remain a justifiable claim in damages for past nuisance which is not available under the statutory environmental protection systems.

The tort of private nuisance is also important because recent legislation has, following earlier patterns of legislative reform, continued to adopt the meaning and definition of common law nuisance in for example the Police, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PSCA 2022) but also in the Anti-Social Behaviour Act

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
Rylands v Fletcher definition
What does Rylands v Fletcher mean?

The rule in Rylands v Fletcher creates a strict liability cause of action for foreseeable damage caused by escapes occasioned by non-natural use of land.

Popular documents