How do I structure my answer for this law question (tort)

Watch
M0rg4ndunn
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Tam bought a cottage in the countryside to live in. His only neighbour was a factory, owned and operated by Ursula. Ursula's factory produced specialist fertilisers which were popular with farmers growing high quality crops. Ursula operated her factory every weekday, often well into the evenings, and Tam could hear the machinery constantly, several times a week, powerful chemical smells blew across Tam’s property from the factory, and he was unable to work in his garden or open his windows. When Tan complained, Ursula responded by beginning operations through the weekend as well.

Ursula kept a large storage tank for chemicals on the land at the back of her factory. During an unusually violent storm, the tank toppled over and the chemicals leaked into a stream that also ran through Tam’s garden. The resulting contamination badly damaged the soil in the garden.

Consider Tams rights and remedies against Ursula in relation to the operation of her factory and in relation to the damage to Tams garden
1
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Duty
Breach
Causation
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by james_law)
Duty
Breach
Causation
comme d'habitude.
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
This is straightforward Nuisance/Rylands v Fletcher.
Regarding the smells and the noise, talk about physical interference and talk about the elements 1 by 1.
Regarding the chemical leak, talk about the Definition of RvF and how the chemical was 'dangerous' and 'escaped' from the Factory, but mention the 'Act of God' Principle of how it was unforeseeable harm.
1
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by james_law)
Duty
Breach
Causation
this is not Negligence!!
0
reply
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by sfh123)
this is not Negligence!!
Yes it is. Rylands v Fletcher and nuisance are just specialised types of negligence, and in any case the lines between RvF, nuisance and negligence (in general) are blurred.
0
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by sfh123)
this is not Negligence!!
LOOOOL
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
Yes it is. Rylands v Fletcher and nuisance are just specialised types of negligence, and in any case the lines between RvF, nuisance and negligence (in general) are blurred.
Although you're right, I'm speaking from the perspective of how you specifically need to answer the given question. From all the examiner reports I've read, a question like this requires no mention of negligence whatsoever. You directly need to apply the principles/case law given in Nuisance/RvF and apply it to the scenario. Negligence can only be mentioned (very briefly) if there is an essay question concerning the development of the law of nuisance and any distinctions that need to be noted between negligence and nuisance; a proposition doesn't require anything except the relevant case law/principles.
0
reply
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by sfh123)
Although you're right, I'm speaking from the perspective of how you specifically need to answer the given question. From all the examiner reports I've read, a question like this requires no mention of negligence whatsoever. You directly need to apply the principles/case law given in Nuisance/RvF and apply it to the scenario. Negligence can only be mentioned (very briefly) if there is an essay question concerning the development of the law of nuisance and any distinctions that need to be noted between negligence and nuisance; a proposition doesn't require anything except the relevant case law/principles.
Oh I would always go straight to the specific rules, of course! But the basic principle of 'Duty, breach, causation' is what would be discussed here.
1
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by sfh123)
Although you're right, I'm speaking from the perspective of how you specifically need to answer the given question. From all the examiner reports I've read, a question like this requires no mention of negligence whatsoever. You directly need to apply the principles/case law given in Nuisance/RvF and apply it to the scenario. Negligence can only be mentioned (very briefly) if there is an essay question concerning the development of the law of nuisance and any distinctions that need to be noted between negligence and nuisance; a proposition doesn't require anything except the relevant case law/principles.
Umm, it very much is negligence.
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by Reality Check)
Umm, it very much is negligence.
Please read this first and then answer.
Attached files
Last edited by sfh123; 1 year ago
0
reply
Trinculo
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by sfh123)
Please read this first and then answer.
I wish the nonsense in your brain hadn't escaped and done mischief to this thread.
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Trinculo)
I wish the nonsense in your brain hadn't escaped and done mischief to this thread.
There's no need to be immature to mask your intellectual deficiencies. I'm simply helping others understand if not learn the law.
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by sfh123)
Please read this first and then answer.
We don't tend to use basic Level 2 textbooks at Cambridge. We learn the law by reading cases, which is what I would strongly urge you to do.
0
reply
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by sfh123)
Please read this first and then answer.
Can I just say that this is to some degree the author's take on the subject. I suggest you go have a read at what the range of academics have to say - there are other opinions available! Besides, this doesn't say that private nuisance isn't related to negligence, what it does it show some differences to state that this is a specific branch of negligence.

I'd just like to ask, what level are you at? I suspect this is A Level material, which often lacks nuance to be more accessible.
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by Reality Check)
We don't tend to use basic Level 2 textbooks at Cambridge. We learn the law by reading cases, which is what I would strongly urge you to do.
Can you pls give me the name of the lecturer/professor that conducts your courses for Civil Law? So I can look into it and learn what they have to say. The picture I cited was actually from a casebook of tort recommended by Cambridge professors specifically.
0
reply
sfh123
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
Can I just say that this is to some degree the author's take on the subject. I suggest you go have a read at what the range of academics have to say - there are other opinions available! Besides, this doesn't say that private nuisance isn't related to negligence, what it does it show some differences to state that this is a specific branch of negligence.

I'd just like to ask, what level are you at? I suspect this is A Level material, which often lacks nuance to be more accessible.
I'm a 3rd-year student at the University of London, I've already obtained a 2:1 in Tort from 2nd year. What about you?
0
reply
username3689312
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
**thread has been de-railed**

(Original post by sfh123)
I'm a 3rd-year student at the University of London, I've already obtained a 2:1 in Tort from 2nd year. What about you?
obtained 2:1 in tort and don't know that the tort of nuisance is a type of negligence.........I think someone is telling porkies.
0
reply
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by sfh123)
I'm a 3rd-year student at the University of London, I've already obtained a 2:1 in Tort from 2nd year. What about you?
I am a third-year student at the University of Leeds who obtained a First in Tort last year.
1
reply
BernardJ
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
Considering that you are asking how to answer the question are you familiar with How To Answer Law Essays and Exams by Stacie Strong who suggests answering questions in a format referred to as CLEO
Claim
Legislation
Evaluation
Outcome
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Who is winning Euro 2020

France (125)
27.41%
England (164)
35.96%
Belgium (33)
7.24%
Germany (43)
9.43%
Spain (10)
2.19%
Italy (39)
8.55%
Netherlands (14)
3.07%
Other (Tell us who) (28)
6.14%

Watched Threads

View All