SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Prepared by:
Abdur Rahman Khan
Department of Law
Bangladesh University of Professionals (BUP)
Email: neerab1998@gmail.com
JGGGHGH
Lecture- 02
General defences against
tortious liability
Overall Brief Regarding General
Defences
❑ https://study.com/academy/lesson/defenses-for-negligence-definition-and-
examples.html
General Defences at a glance
General Defences in details
❑ After violation of legal right by defendant, Resulting in legal damages,
successfully proving the essentials of a tort, The defendant is held liable.
❖ Few exceptions are treated as defences which can help defendant in
absolving from liabilities. These are-
❖ Volenti non fit injuria
❖ No man can sue for suffering harm if he had consented expressly or impliedly.
❖Wooldbridge Vs. Sumner
Clicking photos during the event, he was severely injured by the
defendant’s horse. Defendant was not held liable as the plaintiff
himself consented and voluntarily came there to click photos.
Continued….
❖ If consent obtained by coercion, fraud, mistake etc., defendant held liable.
❖ Lakshmi Rajan Vs. Malar Hospital Ltd.
A 40 years married woman’s breast got lumps. Consent taken by hospital.
During the surgery along with breast’s lumps, her uterus was also removed
without any justification.
❖ R. V. Williams
Teaching students about singing. During the singing lesson convincing a 16 years old
student to give her consent for sexual intercourse to make her a good singer.
❖ R. V. Clarence
Having sexual intercourse with his wife knowing that he is suffering from a
sexually transmitted disease Gonorrhea, Wife sued the husband for doing so
Continued….
❖ Smith V. Baker
Carrying stones by defendant with a crane from one place to another place. During the
shift, a stone was felt on the plaintiff & he was injured though he knew the risk & worked
under the crane. Negligence from defendant was found there.
Exception:
Encountering willingly a risk to rescue somebody from an imminent danger created
by the wrongful act of the defendant, defence of consent won’t be apt here.
❑ Haynes Vs. Harwood
Defendant’s two horses in street. A boy thrown a stone towards the horses and
horses started running here and there. This created danger to women and children
in the street. Danger prevented by police. He was injured for doing so.
❑When plaintiff is the wrongdoer
❑ From an immoral cause, no action arises.Derived from the maxim ex turpi
causa. if the plaintiff himself is engaged in the wrongful act, can’t recover
damages.
❑ Bird vs. Holbrook [ (1828) 4 Bing. 628]
❑ Set a spring gun trap by defendant in his garden to protect his property. The
spring gun trap injured Holbrook (Plaintiff) innocent trespasser. Plaintiff sued
the defendant and claimed for damages.
❑Inevitable Accident
❑ Unexpected injury. Despite exercising due care with diligence and ordinary
prudence by a person, not to foresee or avoid accident.
❑ Stanley vs. Powell [1891] 1 QB 86 (QBD)]
Continued…
❑ Case note: During focusing on a pheasant by defendant, a member of the
party fired but the bullet hit the branch of the tree that altered its direction
and accidentally wounded the plaintiff.
❑ Brown Vs. Kendall
❑ Case note: Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s dogs were fighting. Defendant threw a stone in
attempt to isolate them but that stone accidentally hit plaintiff standing nearby.
❑ Shridhar Tiwari V. UP State Road Transport Corporation (SRTC)
❑ Case note: Bus of up brtc was passing through a village, suddenly a cyclist came
on the road, to save him bus driver applied brakes. But due to wet roads, it
slipped & collided with another bus.
❑ Act of Allah
❑ Extra ordinary occurrence not foreseen and guarded against, natural cause.
❑ Nichols v. Marshland [ (1876) 2 EXD 1]
❑ The natural stream of a river had been dammed up. An extraordinary rainfall came
and broke the embankments and water escaped and destroyed 4 country bridges.
❑ Ramalinga Nadar vs. Narayana Reddiar
❑ Plaintiff had booked goods with the defendant for transportation. The goods
were looted by a mob, the prevention of which was beyond control of defendant.
❑ Kallulal Vs. Hemchand
❑ Rainfall led to collapsing of defendant’s wall when there was a rainfall of
2.66 inches. In this incident plaintiff lost his2 children.
❑Private defence
❑ Using of reasonable force to protect one’s property or oneself. Not to be liable.
Imminent threat, The using force should be proportionate.
❑ Morris vs. Nugent
❑ Defendant was passing by a house, plaintiff’s dog came and bit him. As soon as the
ran away, defendant shot the dog anyway.
❑ Ramanuja Mudall vs. M. Gangan AIR 1954
❑ Defendant had laid some live electric wire on his land without showing any
visible warning. While crossing it to reach his land, received an electric shock.
❑ Creswell Vs. Siri
Defendant shot plaintiff’s dog during chasing his herd of sheep. No other means
was there to stop the dog at that time, So, defendant shot the dog.
❑ Mistake
❑ Mistake of fact or law, is not a defence in general. When a person carefully
interferes with the rights of another person, it is no defence to say that he had
honestly believed that there was some justification for the same.
❑ Consolidated Co. v. Curtis [(1894) 1 Q.B. 495]
❑ An auctioneer was asked to auction certain goods by his customer honestly
believing that the goods belonged to the customer. He auctioned them and he
paid them to the customer. In fact, the goods belonged to the other person.
❑ Necessity
❑ Necessary attempt for welfare of people is supreme law. To avoid or prevent a
great loss or harm, a defendant can cause lesser harm that is justified.
❑ Cope v. Sharpe [(1891) 1 K.B. 496]
Continued…
❑ Case note: Committing trespass to land, Defendant entered plaintiff’s land
to prevent the spread of fire, adjoining land his master had shooting rights.
❑ Carter vs. Thomas [(1891) Q.B. 673]
❑ Committing trespass to land, defendant entered the plaintiff’s premises in good
faith to extinguish a fire at which the fireman had already been working.
❑ Krik vs. Gregory [1891] 1 K.B. 496
❑ After A’s death, A’s sister in law removed the jewellery items with trespass
to jewellery and kept them in another room. Jewellery was stolen by robber.
❑ Vincent vs. Lake Erie Transportation Co, 124 N.W. 221 (Minn. 1910)
❑ a steamship was moored at Vincent’s dock to unload cargo. During storm ship
was secured to dock causing $500 in damage.
❖Statutory Authority
❖ Damage results from the act, which the legislature authorizes or directs to be
done, is not actionable claim. Here injured party has no remedy except for
claiming such compensation provided by the statute.
❖ Hammer Smith Rail Co v. Brand (1869) L.R.H.L. 171
❖ The value of the plaintiff’s property had considerably depreciated due to the noise,
vibration and smoke caused by the running of trains in a railway constructed under
statutory powers. No claim, despite damage was caused.
❖ Smith vs. London and South Western Railway Co. [(1870) L. R 6 C. P. 14]
❖ Servants of a Railway Co. negligently trimmed grass to protect a railway
line. Sparks from an engine set the material on fire. By a heavy
wing, the fire was carried to the plaintiff’s cottage, 200 yards away from
the railway line. The cottage was burnt.
Question Answer Session
To get full sheets, pdf or hard copy
or learn to me:
Name: Abdur Rahman Khan
LL.B (Hons) (4th year), BUP
Email: abdurrahmankhanneerab@gmail.com
Phone: 01782 760964/01798 438184
Address: Mirpur- 02, Dhaka - 1216

More Related Content

What's hot

Justification In Tort
Justification In TortJustification In Tort
Justification In Tort
jayvant1
 
damnum sine injuria.pptx
damnum sine injuria.pptxdamnum sine injuria.pptx
damnum sine injuria.pptx
RajkiranCM1
 

What's hot (20)

2495_Assault and Battery.ppt
2495_Assault and Battery.ppt2495_Assault and Battery.ppt
2495_Assault and Battery.ppt
 
Strict liability
Strict liabilityStrict liability
Strict liability
 
Tort strict absolute liability
Tort  strict absolute liabilityTort  strict absolute liability
Tort strict absolute liability
 
Lawful consideration and object
Lawful consideration and objectLawful consideration and object
Lawful consideration and object
 
kelson theory
kelson theorykelson theory
kelson theory
 
Moot Memorial
Moot MemorialMoot Memorial
Moot Memorial
 
Culpable homicide & murder
Culpable homicide & murderCulpable homicide & murder
Culpable homicide & murder
 
Strict & Absolute Liability
Strict & Absolute LiabilityStrict & Absolute Liability
Strict & Absolute Liability
 
Justification In Tort
Justification In TortJustification In Tort
Justification In Tort
 
Trespass to land
Trespass to landTrespass to land
Trespass to land
 
Remoteness of Damage
Remoteness of DamageRemoteness of Damage
Remoteness of Damage
 
Remedies under law of torts
Remedies under law of tortsRemedies under law of torts
Remedies under law of torts
 
Law of Torts
Law of TortsLaw of Torts
Law of Torts
 
Tort nuisance
Tort nuisanceTort nuisance
Tort nuisance
 
damnum sine injuria.pptx
damnum sine injuria.pptxdamnum sine injuria.pptx
damnum sine injuria.pptx
 
Tort negligence
Tort negligenceTort negligence
Tort negligence
 
Specific Relief Act, 1963
Specific Relief Act, 1963Specific Relief Act, 1963
Specific Relief Act, 1963
 
Vicarious liability
Vicarious liabilityVicarious liability
Vicarious liability
 
An Introduction to Law of Torts: Meaning, Nature and Essential elements
An Introduction to Law of Torts: Meaning, Nature and Essential elementsAn Introduction to Law of Torts: Meaning, Nature and Essential elements
An Introduction to Law of Torts: Meaning, Nature and Essential elements
 
Ubi jus ibi remedium
Ubi jus ibi remediumUbi jus ibi remedium
Ubi jus ibi remedium
 

Similar to General defences against tortious liability, lec 02

Negligence duty of care cases
Negligence duty of care casesNegligence duty of care cases
Negligence duty of care cases
Le Hong Phong
 
Lecture 8 Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
Lecture 8   Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - CasesLecture 8   Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
Lecture 8 Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
Ramona Vansluytman
 

Similar to General defences against tortious liability, lec 02 (20)

Torts cases and_material
Torts cases and_materialTorts cases and_material
Torts cases and_material
 
TORT II [remedy notes]
TORT II [remedy notes]TORT II [remedy notes]
TORT II [remedy notes]
 
General defences of tort
General defences of tortGeneral defences of tort
General defences of tort
 
Ll.b i lot u 3 justification tort
Ll.b i lot u 3 justification  tortLl.b i lot u 3 justification  tort
Ll.b i lot u 3 justification tort
 
Additional week 2.pptx
Additional week 2.pptxAdditional week 2.pptx
Additional week 2.pptx
 
Negligence duty of care cases
Negligence duty of care casesNegligence duty of care cases
Negligence duty of care cases
 
TORT II [strict liability notes]
TORT II [strict liability notes]TORT II [strict liability notes]
TORT II [strict liability notes]
 
INTENTIONAL TRESSPASS TORT.docx
INTENTIONAL TRESSPASS TORT.docxINTENTIONAL TRESSPASS TORT.docx
INTENTIONAL TRESSPASS TORT.docx
 
Dasilva v. Ighodalo
Dasilva v. IghodaloDasilva v. Ighodalo
Dasilva v. Ighodalo
 
tort of Negligence and its application .
tort of Negligence and its application .tort of Negligence and its application .
tort of Negligence and its application .
 
Negligence
NegligenceNegligence
Negligence
 
NEGLIGENCE17[2].ppt
NEGLIGENCE17[2].pptNEGLIGENCE17[2].ppt
NEGLIGENCE17[2].ppt
 
April 2015 2nd Department Updates
April 2015 2nd Department UpdatesApril 2015 2nd Department Updates
April 2015 2nd Department Updates
 
Tort Law: Causation
Tort Law: Causation Tort Law: Causation
Tort Law: Causation
 
Lecture 8 Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
Lecture 8   Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - CasesLecture 8   Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
Lecture 8 Exclusion and Limiting Clauses - Cases
 
negligence.pptx
negligence.pptxnegligence.pptx
negligence.pptx
 
Animals and Negligence - What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
Animals and Negligence -  What Every Attorney Should Know 2012Animals and Negligence -  What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
Animals and Negligence - What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
 
Animals and Negligence: What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
Animals and Negligence:  What Every Attorney Should Know 2012Animals and Negligence:  What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
Animals and Negligence: What Every Attorney Should Know 2012
 
MODULE- IV-DEFENCES.pptx
MODULE- IV-DEFENCES.pptxMODULE- IV-DEFENCES.pptx
MODULE- IV-DEFENCES.pptx
 
Remoteness of damage
Remoteness of damageRemoteness of damage
Remoteness of damage
 

Recently uploaded

Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.docNotes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
BRELGOSIMAT
 
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quizAgrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
gaelcabigunda
 

Recently uploaded (18)

Types of Cybercrime and Its Impact on Society
Types of Cybercrime and Its Impact on SocietyTypes of Cybercrime and Its Impact on Society
Types of Cybercrime and Its Impact on Society
 
DNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptx
DNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptxDNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptx
DNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptx
 
Application of Doctrine of Renvoi by foreign courts under conflict of laws
Application of Doctrine of Renvoi by foreign courts under conflict of lawsApplication of Doctrine of Renvoi by foreign courts under conflict of laws
Application of Doctrine of Renvoi by foreign courts under conflict of laws
 
Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.docNotes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
Notes-on-Prescription-Obligations-and-Contracts.doc
 
VIETNAM - DIRECT POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS (DPPA) - Latest development - What...
VIETNAM - DIRECT POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS (DPPA) - Latest development - What...VIETNAM - DIRECT POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS (DPPA) - Latest development - What...
VIETNAM - DIRECT POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS (DPPA) - Latest development - What...
 
Chambers Global Practice Guide - Corporate M&A 2024 - Canadian M&A
Chambers Global Practice Guide - Corporate M&A 2024 - Canadian M&AChambers Global Practice Guide - Corporate M&A 2024 - Canadian M&A
Chambers Global Practice Guide - Corporate M&A 2024 - Canadian M&A
 
Everything You Should Know About Child Custody and Parenting While Living in ...
Everything You Should Know About Child Custody and Parenting While Living in ...Everything You Should Know About Child Custody and Parenting While Living in ...
Everything You Should Know About Child Custody and Parenting While Living in ...
 
indian evidence act.pdf.......very helpful for law student
indian evidence act.pdf.......very helpful for law studentindian evidence act.pdf.......very helpful for law student
indian evidence act.pdf.......very helpful for law student
 
Book review - Amartya Sen's Idea of Justice
Book review - Amartya Sen's Idea of JusticeBook review - Amartya Sen's Idea of Justice
Book review - Amartya Sen's Idea of Justice
 
RIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptx
RIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptxRIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptx
RIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptx
 
7 Basic Steps of Trust Administration.pdf
7 Basic Steps of Trust Administration.pdf7 Basic Steps of Trust Administration.pdf
7 Basic Steps of Trust Administration.pdf
 
Casa Tradicion v. Casa Azul Spirits (S.D. Tex. 2024)
Casa Tradicion v. Casa Azul Spirits (S.D. Tex. 2024)Casa Tradicion v. Casa Azul Spirits (S.D. Tex. 2024)
Casa Tradicion v. Casa Azul Spirits (S.D. Tex. 2024)
 
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdfALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf
 
PRECEDENT AS A SOURCE OF LAW (SAIF JAVED).pptx
PRECEDENT AS A SOURCE OF LAW (SAIF JAVED).pptxPRECEDENT AS A SOURCE OF LAW (SAIF JAVED).pptx
PRECEDENT AS A SOURCE OF LAW (SAIF JAVED).pptx
 
Solidarity and Taxation: the Ubuntu approach in South Africa
Solidarity and Taxation: the Ubuntu approach in South AfricaSolidarity and Taxation: the Ubuntu approach in South Africa
Solidarity and Taxation: the Ubuntu approach in South Africa
 
Charge and its essentials rules Under the CRPC, 1898
Charge and its essentials rules Under the CRPC, 1898Charge and its essentials rules Under the CRPC, 1898
Charge and its essentials rules Under the CRPC, 1898
 
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quizAgrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
Agrarian Reform Policies in the Philippines: a quiz
 
Justice Advocates Legal Defence Firm
Justice Advocates Legal Defence FirmJustice Advocates Legal Defence Firm
Justice Advocates Legal Defence Firm
 

General defences against tortious liability, lec 02

  • 1. Prepared by: Abdur Rahman Khan Department of Law Bangladesh University of Professionals (BUP) Email: neerab1998@gmail.com
  • 2. JGGGHGH Lecture- 02 General defences against tortious liability
  • 3. Overall Brief Regarding General Defences ❑ https://study.com/academy/lesson/defenses-for-negligence-definition-and- examples.html
  • 5. General Defences in details ❑ After violation of legal right by defendant, Resulting in legal damages, successfully proving the essentials of a tort, The defendant is held liable. ❖ Few exceptions are treated as defences which can help defendant in absolving from liabilities. These are- ❖ Volenti non fit injuria ❖ No man can sue for suffering harm if he had consented expressly or impliedly. ❖Wooldbridge Vs. Sumner Clicking photos during the event, he was severely injured by the defendant’s horse. Defendant was not held liable as the plaintiff himself consented and voluntarily came there to click photos.
  • 6. Continued…. ❖ If consent obtained by coercion, fraud, mistake etc., defendant held liable. ❖ Lakshmi Rajan Vs. Malar Hospital Ltd. A 40 years married woman’s breast got lumps. Consent taken by hospital. During the surgery along with breast’s lumps, her uterus was also removed without any justification. ❖ R. V. Williams Teaching students about singing. During the singing lesson convincing a 16 years old student to give her consent for sexual intercourse to make her a good singer. ❖ R. V. Clarence Having sexual intercourse with his wife knowing that he is suffering from a sexually transmitted disease Gonorrhea, Wife sued the husband for doing so
  • 7. Continued…. ❖ Smith V. Baker Carrying stones by defendant with a crane from one place to another place. During the shift, a stone was felt on the plaintiff & he was injured though he knew the risk & worked under the crane. Negligence from defendant was found there. Exception: Encountering willingly a risk to rescue somebody from an imminent danger created by the wrongful act of the defendant, defence of consent won’t be apt here. ❑ Haynes Vs. Harwood Defendant’s two horses in street. A boy thrown a stone towards the horses and horses started running here and there. This created danger to women and children in the street. Danger prevented by police. He was injured for doing so.
  • 8. ❑When plaintiff is the wrongdoer ❑ From an immoral cause, no action arises.Derived from the maxim ex turpi causa. if the plaintiff himself is engaged in the wrongful act, can’t recover damages. ❑ Bird vs. Holbrook [ (1828) 4 Bing. 628] ❑ Set a spring gun trap by defendant in his garden to protect his property. The spring gun trap injured Holbrook (Plaintiff) innocent trespasser. Plaintiff sued the defendant and claimed for damages. ❑Inevitable Accident ❑ Unexpected injury. Despite exercising due care with diligence and ordinary prudence by a person, not to foresee or avoid accident. ❑ Stanley vs. Powell [1891] 1 QB 86 (QBD)]
  • 9. Continued… ❑ Case note: During focusing on a pheasant by defendant, a member of the party fired but the bullet hit the branch of the tree that altered its direction and accidentally wounded the plaintiff. ❑ Brown Vs. Kendall ❑ Case note: Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s dogs were fighting. Defendant threw a stone in attempt to isolate them but that stone accidentally hit plaintiff standing nearby. ❑ Shridhar Tiwari V. UP State Road Transport Corporation (SRTC) ❑ Case note: Bus of up brtc was passing through a village, suddenly a cyclist came on the road, to save him bus driver applied brakes. But due to wet roads, it slipped & collided with another bus.
  • 10. ❑ Act of Allah ❑ Extra ordinary occurrence not foreseen and guarded against, natural cause. ❑ Nichols v. Marshland [ (1876) 2 EXD 1] ❑ The natural stream of a river had been dammed up. An extraordinary rainfall came and broke the embankments and water escaped and destroyed 4 country bridges. ❑ Ramalinga Nadar vs. Narayana Reddiar ❑ Plaintiff had booked goods with the defendant for transportation. The goods were looted by a mob, the prevention of which was beyond control of defendant. ❑ Kallulal Vs. Hemchand ❑ Rainfall led to collapsing of defendant’s wall when there was a rainfall of 2.66 inches. In this incident plaintiff lost his2 children.
  • 11. ❑Private defence ❑ Using of reasonable force to protect one’s property or oneself. Not to be liable. Imminent threat, The using force should be proportionate. ❑ Morris vs. Nugent ❑ Defendant was passing by a house, plaintiff’s dog came and bit him. As soon as the ran away, defendant shot the dog anyway. ❑ Ramanuja Mudall vs. M. Gangan AIR 1954 ❑ Defendant had laid some live electric wire on his land without showing any visible warning. While crossing it to reach his land, received an electric shock. ❑ Creswell Vs. Siri Defendant shot plaintiff’s dog during chasing his herd of sheep. No other means was there to stop the dog at that time, So, defendant shot the dog.
  • 12. ❑ Mistake ❑ Mistake of fact or law, is not a defence in general. When a person carefully interferes with the rights of another person, it is no defence to say that he had honestly believed that there was some justification for the same. ❑ Consolidated Co. v. Curtis [(1894) 1 Q.B. 495] ❑ An auctioneer was asked to auction certain goods by his customer honestly believing that the goods belonged to the customer. He auctioned them and he paid them to the customer. In fact, the goods belonged to the other person. ❑ Necessity ❑ Necessary attempt for welfare of people is supreme law. To avoid or prevent a great loss or harm, a defendant can cause lesser harm that is justified. ❑ Cope v. Sharpe [(1891) 1 K.B. 496]
  • 13. Continued… ❑ Case note: Committing trespass to land, Defendant entered plaintiff’s land to prevent the spread of fire, adjoining land his master had shooting rights. ❑ Carter vs. Thomas [(1891) Q.B. 673] ❑ Committing trespass to land, defendant entered the plaintiff’s premises in good faith to extinguish a fire at which the fireman had already been working. ❑ Krik vs. Gregory [1891] 1 K.B. 496 ❑ After A’s death, A’s sister in law removed the jewellery items with trespass to jewellery and kept them in another room. Jewellery was stolen by robber. ❑ Vincent vs. Lake Erie Transportation Co, 124 N.W. 221 (Minn. 1910) ❑ a steamship was moored at Vincent’s dock to unload cargo. During storm ship was secured to dock causing $500 in damage.
  • 14. ❖Statutory Authority ❖ Damage results from the act, which the legislature authorizes or directs to be done, is not actionable claim. Here injured party has no remedy except for claiming such compensation provided by the statute. ❖ Hammer Smith Rail Co v. Brand (1869) L.R.H.L. 171 ❖ The value of the plaintiff’s property had considerably depreciated due to the noise, vibration and smoke caused by the running of trains in a railway constructed under statutory powers. No claim, despite damage was caused. ❖ Smith vs. London and South Western Railway Co. [(1870) L. R 6 C. P. 14] ❖ Servants of a Railway Co. negligently trimmed grass to protect a railway line. Sparks from an engine set the material on fire. By a heavy wing, the fire was carried to the plaintiff’s cottage, 200 yards away from the railway line. The cottage was burnt.
  • 16. To get full sheets, pdf or hard copy or learn to me: Name: Abdur Rahman Khan LL.B (Hons) (4th year), BUP Email: abdurrahmankhanneerab@gmail.com Phone: 01782 760964/01798 438184 Address: Mirpur- 02, Dhaka - 1216