Jump to content

Hamilton v Papakura District Council

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hamilton v Papakura District Council (New Zealand)
CourtJudicial Committee of the Privy Council
Full case name Hamilton & Anor v. Papakura District Council & Watercare Services Limited
Decided28 February 2002
Citation[2000] 1 NZLR 265, [2002] 3 NZLR 308, [2002] UKPC 9
TranscriptPrivy Council judgment
Court membership
Judges sittingLord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hutton, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Sir Andrew Leggatt, Sir Kenneth Keith
Keywords
negligence

Hamilton v Papakura District Council (New Zealand) [2002] UKPC 9 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability under tort for negligence under Rylands v Fletcher.[1]

Background

[edit]

The Hamiltons grew hydroponic cherry tomatoes, using the Papakura town water supply to supply their water needs. When they found their crop had been destroyed, they claimed that the water supply company and the local council were at fault, claiming that the water was contaminated by minute traces of herbicide in the water supply.

They claimed that this was a breach of the Sale of Goods Act [1908].

References

[edit]
  1. ^ McLay, Geoff (2003). Butterworths Student Companion Torts (4th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71686-X.