Noted Canadian environmental lawyer Dianne Saxe has prepared an excellent video analysis of a recent Canadian appellate decision, Smith v. Inco, that looks at the application of the famous strict liability case from England, Rylands v. Fletcher,  UKHL 1, (1868) 3 L.R. 330, in an environmental nuisance action involving contamination from a nickel refinery. Rylands has been discussed, dissected, and relied upon by courts throughout the United States for over a century, as well as incorporated in the Restatement of Torts, Restat 2d of Torts, § 519, § 520, so Dianne's analysis is worthwhile for attorneys both in the United States and Canada. Dianne's video analysis and a copy of the Smith v. Inco decision are available in the links in her blog post below.
By Dianne Saxe, Ontario Environmental Lawyer
We continue to mull over Smith v. Inco, and the major implications that has for virtually all cases involving Rylands v. Fletcher, and for a significant number of nuisance cases. Watch our video on the case, made in cooperation with Nimonik. Then please let us know what you think.
Reprinted with permission from the Environmental Law and Litigation Blog.
The Environmental Law and Litigation Blog has been selected as a 2011 LexisNexis Top 50 Blog for Environmental Law & Climate Change winner.
Lexis.com subscribers may also want to access the recent federal court decision in Roeder v. Atl. Richfield Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101870 (D. Nev. Aug. 30, 2011), involving a nuisance action concerning a closed copper mine, in which the court noted that Nevada has adopted the Rylands doctrine of strict liability.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.