Past year question 09/10

Question Two

Issue:

1. Whether Ramli can take cause of action under the Rylands v Fletcher rule against Ramlan
or not?
2. Whether there is any remedy available for Ramli to seek against Ramlan as his act had
consequently caused injury to him as well as destruction to his crops and vegetables?

The first issue in this case is whether Ramli can take cause of action under the Rylands v
Fletcher rule against Ramlan or not?

The rule of Rylands v Fletcher is also known as strict liability. It is used to describe liability
which is imposed on the defendant without any proof of fault on his part. So, although the
defendant might have taken all reasonable steps to avoid or minimize risk arising from his activity,
he may still be found liable. There are five elements which are required to be fulfilled in order to
establish the liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. The five elements are thing likely to
cause damage if it escapes, intentional accumulation, escape, non-natural use of land and lastly
the foreseeability of damage.

Tort of strict liability originates from the case Rylands v Fletcher. In this case, the defendant
mill owner employed some independent contractors to build a reservoir. Beneath this reservoir
were some iron shafts that went through mining area and which were connected to the plaintiff’s
mine. The defendant did not know of the existence of these shafts and the contractors were
negligent in not blocking the shafts. The plaintiff’s mine was flooded when the reservoir was filled
with water. The court held that the person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and
collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril,
and, if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural
consequences of its escape. This statement is known as the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Besides
that, the court also ruled that the rule only applied where the defendant had used his land for a
non-natural use. According to the case of Rickards v Lothian, the meaning of non-natural use of
land is it must be some special use bringing with it increased danger to others and must not merely
be the ordinary use of the land or such a use as is proper for the general benefit of the community.
Whereas in the case of Hoon Wee Thim v Pacific Tin Consolidated Corporation, the defendants
had built a reservoir on their land which was above ground level. A heavy rainfall caused the
water-bunds to collapse, as a result of which escaped onto the adjacent land, and the deceased
drowned. The administrators of the deceased’s estate claimed for damages. The court held that
using sand-bunds to separate ponds of water constitutes a dangerous and non-natural use of land
and any resulting damage would be caught under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. As the reservoir
was situated close to an area which was thickly populated, the defendants were using their land
in a special way bring with it increased danger to others.

In the instance case, the usage of sand-bands to separate ponds of water is alleged by Ramlan
as a reasonable precaution. However, according to the case of Hoon Wee Thim, it actually
constitutes a dangerous and non-natural use of land. In addition, the act of Ramlan that built a
reservoir on his land which situated close to an area which was thickly populated, is seen as using
his land in a special way bring with it increased danger to others. Therefore, Ramlan is said to be
liable under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, he should responsible for any damage which resulted
by his act in the case such as the personal injury of this neighbor, Ramli and his crops and
vegetables which had been destroyed as a result of the flood.

The second issue of this case is Whether Ramli is able to claim any damages against Ramlan
as his act had consequently caused injury to him as well as destruction to his crops and vegetables?

Damages comprises monetary compensation and is the main and most common form of
remedy sought by the plaintiff in a tort action. In order to successfully claim for damages, the
plaintiff must prove two things, firstly, the tort has occurred and secondly, the plaintiff has
suffered some damage. Damages may still be awarded by the court as recognition of the right of
the plaintiff. A person who had suffered personal injury or his property had damaged due to the
tort of another person, his is entitled to the award of damages so that his losses can be
compensated. There are six types of damages such as general damages, special damages,
contemptuous damages, exemplary damages, nominal damages and aggravated damages. Special
damages refer to damage or loss which the law does not presume to arise from the tort.
Question Three

a) Extra-judicial remedies are the remedies obtained by way of self-help, where the
aggrieved party need not resort to judicial proceedings in order to assert his right. The
instances for this type of remedies are self-help and abatement of nuisance. For self-help,
there is a general principle states that when a mishap befalls a person or his property, he
must act accordingly so as to minimize the extent of his loss or damage. For abatement
of nuisance, an occupier of land or any other person by the authority of the occupier may
abate or remove the nuisance. Prior notice ought to be given to the offending party as to
the proposed act of abatement, except there is a situation of emergency or in order to
reduce the nuisance, one is not required to enter onto the land of the other part. Whereas
judicial remedies are remedies that are sought and obtained by the plaintiff through an
action in a court of law. There are three types of judicial remedies, namely damages,
injunction and specific restitution of property. Damages comprises monetary
compensation and is main and most common form of remedy sought by the plaintiff in a
tort action. Injunction is an additional remedy and may be obtained and addition to
general damages where damages alone are not a sufficient or appropriate remedy. An
injunction is an order by the court which has the effect of either prohibiting the defendant
from repeating or continuing his act, or it may be an order requesting the defendant to
do something positive. The remedy of specific restitution of property would arise in the
torts of conversion or detinue or trespass to land. The court will not normally order a
specific restitution of property if damages would be an adequate remedy.

b) Contemptuous damages are awarded to a plaintiff when the court feels that the plaintiff
does not have a good claim. It is awarded when the court does not in fact support the
plaintiff’s claim, it feels that the plaintiff is deserved what happened to him such as libel,
slander, false imprisonment and assault and the amount of damages awarded is the
smallest denomination of money. Where the contemptuous damages are awarded,
however the judge has the discretion to instruct the plaintiff to bear the costs of both
parties. While for exemplary damages, they are awarded to deter the defendant from
repeating his act in the future. Hence, its function is not compensatory, but as a
punishment and deterrent to the defendant. Exemplary damages may be awarded in
addition to general damages or aggravated damages. The example of case for exemplary
damages is Rookes v Barnard. In this case, the plaintiff was an employee of BOAC and a
member of its trade union. The plaintiff was not satisfied with the trade union and wanted
to terminate his membership. The defendants who were the union officials met the
employer and threatened to go on strike unless BOAC forced the plaintiff to resign. The
plaintiff’s employment was subsequently terminated, and he claimed against several of
the trade union members. The House of Lord held that the exemplary damages could not
be awarded in this situation but only can be awarded in the following circumstances,
firstly, where the p has been a victim of oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional acts of
servants of the government, or secondly, where the d’s act in disregarding the p’s right
has been calculated by him to bring in profit which exceeds the amount of compensation
 that he might have to pay the p, or thirdly, where a statue allows for the award of
exemplary damages.

c) What is aggravated damages and exemplary? Function? Cases?

The statement: compensatory, what had happened to p/ the effect of p, thn award the
damages; punishment,
Bumiputra-Commerce Bank Bhd v Top-A Plastic Sdn Bhd, the difference btwn
compensatory n punitive damages is that in assessing the former, what ought to be
considered is hw much the p ought to receive, whereas in assessing the latter, the
consideration is hw much the d ought to pay.
10/11

Question 1

Issue 1: Selia can sue Baki or not?

Law 1: GR – receives voluntarily, liable; receives involuntarily w/o hving requested for the
goods, nt liable for conversion. Need x do more thn wt would be reasonably necessary to
ensure the safekeeping of those goods. Lethbridge v Philips

Issue 2: Alias can claim for his losses from who?

Law 2: GR – the d does more thn wt he ought to do, he may incur liability. Hiort v Bott

Issue 3: can salia and alias claim the second painting?

Law 3: Person who hv either possession in fact or the right to immediate possession may claim
in conversion. Lord v Price

Question 2

i. Issue 1: Can sue or nt?

Law 1: mental state of the d, the interference of d must be voluntary. Kirk v Gregory
Conclusion 1: can

ii. Mental state: National Coal Board v Evans

Interference: Kirk v Gregory

Question 4

i. Definition of Strict liability. Facts and judgement of Rylands v Fletcher. Explain

element one by one?
ii. Things likely to cause damages if it escapes, intentional storage, escape, non-natural
use of land, foreseeability of damages
iii. Non-natural use of land. Rickards v Lothian