header-logo header-logo

12 October 2012
Issue: 7533 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Nuisance

Stannard (t/a Wyvern Tyres) v Gore [2012] EWCA Civ 1248, [2012] All ER (D) 44 (Oct)

The case law suggested that, in an appropriate case, damage caused by fire emanating from an adjoining property could fall within the Rylands v Fletcher rule. The appropriate case, however, was likely to be very rare, because (i) it was the “thing” that had been brought onto the land which had to escape, not the fire which was started or increased by the “thing”; (ii) while the fire might be a dangerous thing, the occasions when fire as such was deliberately brought onto the land might be limited to cases where the fire had been deliberately or negligently started by the occupier or one for whom he was responsible; and (iii) in any event, starting a fire on one’s land might be an ordinary use of the land.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

From global fraud cases to fishing off-grid, Mishcon de Reya’s chair of dispute resolution Hugo Plowman discusses mentors, management switching off

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll