TORT 2.2B STRICT LIABILITY DEFENCES
We move on to: DEFENCES: The defendant can plead/claim that:
:: The Plaintiff (i.e. claimant/injured party) is at fault or is contributorily negligent. See Pointing V Noakes (above)
:: Consent/authorization of the claimant/plaintiff.
:: The escape and damage was unforeseeable, incomprehensible not self-induced. i.e. an Act of nature: like floods, storm, hurricane and so on causing things on his land to escape and damage neighbouring properties-Nichols V Marsland. Although in recent times, the courts have required a stricter proof. See Corporation of Greenok v. Caledonian Railway Co.
:: Statutory authority: the defendant can show that he is expressly protected by law from liability resulting from damage notwithstanding they were caused by him.
:: Deliberate Act of an Unauthorised Stranger. In Perry V Kendricks Transport Ltd, where mischievous children threw a lighted match into the defendant’s petrol tank (and there was an explosion which damaged neighbouring properties) the defendant (owner of the vehicle) was not liable. In Box V Jubb, the defendant was not liable for the flooding caused by his reservoir because a third party had emptied their reservoir into his own.
The REMEDY is damages for losses/damage/injuries arising. Although the courts in Cambridge Waterworks v. Eastern Counties Leather, have noted that the damage resulting from the escape must have been reasonably foreseeable.
