Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

A level Law: Tort Law > 3.5 Nuisance and the escape of dangerous things > Flashcards

3.5 Nuisance and the escape of dangerous things Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

What is private nuisance

A

protects rights of an occupier against ‘unreasonable interference with enjoyment or use of the land’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What must C have in order to bring a claim of private nuisance?

A

Interest in the land
- C doesn’t need to own or occupy the land, just use it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is a case for use of land in private nuisance

A

Jones Ltd v Portsmouth City Council

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Facts of Jones LTD v Portsmouth City Council

A

C ran brokers in city, the road was owned by HCC. 2 trees outside the property whos roots ran into property and the loss of moisture led to subcidence of property. HCC had deal with PCC that they would maintain the trees.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Held in Jones LTD v Portsmouth City Council

A

PCC were liable as they had control over the trees (legal interest in the land)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are some examples of what ‘interference’ can be

A
  • flooding
  • smells
  • noise
  • cricket balls
  • physical damage
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is ‘unlawful interference’

A

unreasonable use of the land and unreasonable interference

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What will the courts consider when taking into account what would be an interference and unreasonable.

A
  • Nature of locality/neighbourhood
  • Duration
  • Sensitivity
  • Malice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are the rules of Nature of locality/neighbourhood in private nuisance

A
  • Industrial areas allow more room for nuisance than residential areas
  • Planning premissions can change locality, dont give premission fo rnuisance
  • If nuisance causes damage, locality irrelavent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Case for nature of locality

A

Hirose Electrical v Peak Ingredients (2011)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Facts of Hirose Electrical v Peak Ingredients (2011)

A

D manufactured food ingredients for his curries. C worked next to his factory manufacturing phone parts, both took place in an industrial estate. C brought action because of the smell

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Held in Hirose Electrical V Peak Ingredients

A

D wasn’t found liable because of the locality of the business’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are the rules of ‘Duration’ in private nuisance

A

Longer it lasts the greater the nuisance, more likely hood of unlawful interference.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the rules of ‘sensitivity’ in private nuisance

A

If C is abnormally sensitive, or land is sensity, D will not be liable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What the exception to this

A

If nuisance would amount to nuisance of a reasonable person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what is a case for sensitivity

A

Robinson v Kilver (1889)

17
Q

facts of robinson v kilver (1889)

A

D had a factory that made paper boxes and it needed to be warm and dry. C rented ground floor to sotre brown paper, which got damaged due to the heat.

18
Q

Held in Robinson v Kilver (1889)

A

No nuisance, it was found that normal paper wouldn’t have been damaged in those conditions.

19
Q

What are the rules for ‘malice’ in private nuisance

A

If D actions are malicious, more likely to be held unreasonable

20
Q

How is foreseeability taken into account in private nuisance

A

Foreseeability works the same as in negligence
- Cambridge water v Eastern Countries Leather plc added forseeability
- In hunter v Canary Wharf judges rulled out possibility of claiming for purely personal injury fromm nuisance

21
Q

What type of liability is Rylands v Fletcher

A

Strict - meaning D can be liable without being negligent

22
Q

What is Rylands v Fletcher

A

Escape of non naturally stored things onto adjoining property causing damages

23
Q

What are the case details of Ryland v Fletcher

A

D constructed a reservoir on his land, above a disused mine. Water filtered throught to the ground and to the mine and spread to a neighbouring mine owned by C, causing damage.

24
Q

What did Lord Cranworth say as a result of this case

A

‘If a person brings or accumulates , on his land anything which, if escaped will cause damage, he does so at his own peril. If it does escape and cause damage, he’s responsible, however careful he may have been’

25
Q

What are the requirements to bring action for Rylands v Fletcher

A
  • accumulation on D land
  • thing likely to do mischief if escaped
  • escape
  • non-natural use of land
  • damage must not be too remote
26
Q

What are the requirements to achieve ‘accumulation’

A
  • D must bring hazardous thing onto land and keep it there
  • Thing must be accumulated for D’s purpose
  • Thing that escaped doesn’t have to be the thing accumulated
26
Q

What are the requirements to achieve ‘accumulation’

A
  • D must bring hazardous thing onto land and keep it there
  • Thing must be accumulated for D’s purpose
  • Thing that escaped doesn’t have to be the thing accumulated
27
Q

What is a case for accumulation in Rylands v Fletcher

A

Giles v Walker 1890

28
Q

Facts of Giles v Walker 1890

A

Seeds from some thisles on D’s land got blown onto the C’s farm and destroyed his crops

29
Q

Held in Giles v Walker 1890

A

D was not liable as he had not brough the thing onto his land, it accumulated naturally

30
Q

What are the rules for ‘things likely to do mischief if escaped’ in Rylands v Fletcher

A
  • Doesn’t have to be hazardous, just do damage if escaped
  • Lord Hoffman stated ‘damages for personal injury are not recoverable’
31
Q

What is escape in Rylands v Fletcher

A

Must be from a set of circumstances which the D has control over which a set of circumstances the D hasn’t got control

32
Q

What are the rules of ‘non natural use of land’

A
  • must be ‘extraordinary and unusual’ at 1 time and 1 place but not at another time and another place
33
Q

What is a case for ‘non-natural use of land’

A

TransCo v Stockport (2004)

34
Q

facts of TransCo v Stockport (2004)

A

Water supply pipes leaked onto encroachment which housed C’s gas supply pipes. Gas pipes collapsed and caused damage.

35
Q

Held in TransCo v Stockport (2004)

A

D were not liable for damages as the pipes were not extraordinary or unusual.

36
Q

What are some Defences to Rylands v Fletcher

A
  • Act of stranger
  • Wrongful act of a third party
  • Act of god
  • Statutory authority
  • Consent/Benefit

A level Law: Tort Law (16 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions