Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather [1994] 2 AC 264
Court: House of Lords
Basic Facts:
Leather manufacturers used a solvent that seeped into the ground and contaminated a water borehole 1.3 miles away.
Issue for the Court:
In what circumstances can the Rylands v Fletcher rule be applied?
Held: No damages were awarded in respect of both nuisance and Rylands as it was not reasonably foreseeable when the chemicals were brought on to the land that if they escaped, the pollution to Dās water would have been occurred. However, C was entitled to an injunction respect of the nuisance created by the spillage (which had been granted by the Court of Appeal)
Lord Goff (allowing the appeal)
Strict liability under Rylands v Fletcher applies to nuisances caused by the non-natural use of land. However, foreseeability of damage is a key factor.
The use of solvents was not deemed a "non-natural" use of land in this case, and foreseeability of the damage was crucial. The court found that the damage was not foreseeable.