## Facts

- A red gum tree on the defendant's property was struck by lightning and caught fire.
- The defendant did not fully extinguish the fire but allowed it to smoulder, believing it would burn itself out.
- The fire subsequently reignited and spread to the plaintiff’s neighbouring property, resulting in significant damage.
- The plaintiff sought to hold the defendant liable for this damage caused by the spread of fire.

## Issues

1. Whether a landowner owes a duty of care to prevent natural hazards originating on their property, such as fire, from causing harm to neighbouring land.
2. What standard of care is expected of the landowner in responding to naturally occurring dangers.
3. Whether the defendant's actions in response to the fire satisfied the standard required by law.

## Decision

- The Privy Council held the defendant liable for the damage caused by the fire spreading to the plaintiff’s property.
- The decision established that landowners must take reasonable steps to prevent or mitigate harm from naturally occurring hazards on their land when such harm is foreseeable.
- The duty is qualified by the landowner’s knowledge of the hazard, their ability to address it, and the practicality of preventative measures.

## Legal Principles

- Landowners may be liable for damage caused by the spread of natural hazards—such as fire—from their property, even if the hazard was not of their own making.
- The duty of care depends on reasonable foreseeability of harm, knowledge of the hazard, and the landowner’s capacity to abate the risk.
- The standard of care is that expected of a reasonable person in the circumstances, balancing the magnitude of risk and practicality or cost of prevention.
- The duty is not absolute; it does not require extraordinary or impractical efforts to prevent hazards.
- Subsequent case law, including Leakey v National Trust [1980] QB 485, broadened and clarified the scope of the duty to include other natural hazards.

## Conclusion

Goldman v Hargrave confirmed that landowners have a duty to act reasonably in preventing the foreseeable spread of natural hazards from their land to neighbouring properties, and liability may arise where steps to prevent such harm are not taken when practical and reasonable to do so.


Goldman v Hargrave [1967] 1 AC 645