The claim in Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] did not succeed because the harm suffered (a polluted water supply) was considered an unforeseeable consequence of the chemical spillages.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

the foreseeability requirement was added by Lord Goff in Cambridge Water and, having found that the other three requirements for liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher were made out, he said that the claim could not succeed as there was no way the defendants could have foreseen that chemicals they spilled would have escaped from their land and entered the claimant's water borehole over a mile away.

The Claim in Cambridge Water Co Ltd V Eastern Counties