According to Cambridge Water, what additional requirement must be met for a claim under Rylands v Fletcher?

In the context of the Rylands v Fletcher principle established in tort law, the addition presented in Cambridge Water establishes that for a claim to be successful, the type of damage must indeed be foreseeable. This requirement is significant because it aligns with the broader principles of negligence and liability, where foreseeability plays a critical role in determining whether a defendant can be held accountable for the consequences of their actions.

The necessity of foreseeability means that the defendant could reasonably anticipate that their actions—specifically, the storage and potential escape of hazardous substances—could lead to certain types of damage. If the damage incurred was not foreseeable, it becomes much harder for the claimant to argue that the defendant is liable under this strict liability framework. This shift means that, unlike the original Rylands v Fletcher case, where liability was automatic upon the escape of something dangerous, Cambridge Water clarified that foreseeability adds a critical layer to the analysis of liability.

In contrast, the other options present conditions that do not align with the additional requirements identified in the Cambridge Water case. Recognizing these distinctions helps reinforce the key concept of foreseeability in tort claims under Rylands v Fletcher.