Alphacell v Wodward [1972] AC 824
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:03:31 UTC
Alphacell is a manufacturer whose pollution pumps were not working and this allowed pollution to enter the nearby river.
They were convicted and their appeal was rejected.
-
HL rejected their appeal since “causing polluting matter to enter the river” was a strict liability offence.
Causing had a common sense meaning and no state of mind was required to be guilty.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Rylands v Fletcher
A person who brings onto their land and keeps there anything that is likely to do mischief if it escapes is strictly liable for any damage that results from its escape, even if they took all reasonab...
Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather
Defendant had a factory whose chemicals seeped into the ground entering a well that Plaintiff had bought to supply water to town residents. Although there were no health risks, an EU directive forbad...
Tate & Lyle v GLC
Ferry terminals constructed by the defendants in the River Thames caused excessive silting. This disrupted the plaintiff's business by obstructing access to their jetty and they had to spend large su...
Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Ltd
A sewer operated by Defendant kept overflowing due to overuse and flooding Plaintiff’s home. Defendant tried to claim nuisance but HL rejected it since there was a statutory scheme to deal with probl...
Hill v Tupper
Plaintiff owned an allotment of land on the side of a river ran his boat on the river which he was allowed to do by the council for his business. Court held that this was a licence and could not be a...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.