LOST YET PRESENT: THE RISE AND FALL OF A BREAKTHROUGH – RELEVANCE OF RYLANDS V. FLETCHER IN THE CONTEMPORARY EPOCH

The landmark case – Rylands v. Fletcher marks the fons et origo of one of the most critical aspects of the Law of Torts – Strict Liability, making it a milestone in this specific branch of law. As per the ‘Pigeon Hole Theory’ formulated by Salmond, up until 1868, judgments were passed based on precedent verdicts and known tortious activities which fitted into its designated ‘Pigeon Holes’. However, a brand-new situation arose, which shook the judiciary, as no other precedent was found similar to it. This case was utterly complicated as the defendant was neither negligent nor had any intention to do whatever he had done indirectly. This called for the establishment of a revolutionary rule that penalised the tort feasor for keeping any such dangerous thing with him, which, if escaped, could cause substantial harm to others. Having been immensely influential in the era, which could be traced back to the 1800s, the rule quite naturally lost its hold and dominance over the ages, deeming it seemingly redundant in the modern period. However, the relevance of this rule has not yet vanished; it still is, de facto, very much pertinent, even to this day. Since this rule deals with possessions of hazardous things which hold the power to cause damage if broken free, unless and until industrialisation ceases to exist, this rule will not lose its grip over the concept of culpability either. This rule might be concealed by various other present-day judgements, but as the ancient saying goes, old is gold – this rule is the grundnorm, the underlying basis of determining the accountability of commercial enterprises, keeping an eye on their notoriety in handling perilous objects. This, being a crucial case, is vast and has various minute details, implications, and elements, which will be explored in this paper henceforth. This topic is not to be dismissed as extraneous because what’s out of sight is not necessarily out of mind – and that is exactly the main aim of the paper. The crux of this article is to deconstruct the past, present and future of the archaic judgment, proving its relevance in the 21st century and in times yet to unfold by revisiting the rule, its origin, the essential conditions, defences and various other allied concepts.