Intro to private nuisance 1 Flashcards
This topic focuses on duties imposed upon….
Duties imposed upon occupiers of land (Steele, 4th ed)
PN is … than negligence
stricter
What does the rule in Ryland’s appear to determine
-That there is liability for damage done by the escape of dangerous things accumulated on one’s land regardless of fault
Definition of PN
any activity or a state of affairs causing a substantial and unreasonable interference with (i) C’s land or (ii) C’s use or enjoyment of that land.
Gist of liability in PN is
the unreasonable interference with the C’s interest. (The effect on property, not whether how the D behaved, a reasonable person would do the same).
Two cautionary comments on PN law
- that it is ‘vague’- (Newark)
- ‘It is necessary to turn to previous decisions to determine whether an interference is actionable’- Steele (4th ed)
what 2 other causes of action apart from PN protects interests in land
- Trespass to land
- public nuisance (puN)
what is the definition of trespass to land
any direct and unjustifiable interference with land in the possession of another; actionable per se [intrinsically wrongful].
definition of public nuisance
unlawful conduct that materially affects the comfort and convenience of a class of her majesty’s subjects: e.g., interference with the public’s right of passage along the highway (Castle v St Augustine’s Links).
case for the definition of public N
Castle v St Augustine’s Links
which statute identified public N as protecting ‘health, property, morals or comfort of society’
- Archbold’s Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice (2005, para 31.40)
How is public N a hybrid cause of action
You can invoke it as a crime and an action in tort.
public N- case about swimming without clothes
R v Crunden
2 Facts about pub N
- injunctions granted
- damages recoverable where C has suffered ‘special damage’ (personal injury or economic loss)
What does Steele say about pub N
It is ‘even more indistinct in its boundaries than … private nuisance’
what does PN encompass
physical damage to C’s land (Wringe v Cohen)
case for PN encompassing physical damage to C’s land
Wringe v Cohen
What was held in Wringe v Cohen
that the law is going to apply strictness, where physical damage is concerned,
What other case apart from Wringe v Cohen shows the strictness of PN law
- Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan
What was held in Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan about intangible damage
that intangible damage (noise, smells, dust) is unreasonable damage and are protean (Lord Wright)
Which 2 cases highlight how a ‘business’ of some kind can be of disturbance to society
- Thompson-Schwab v Costaki (brothel)
- Laws v Florinplace (sex centre)
What was held in Khorasandjian
that for a claim to be successful in PN, C must have a proprietary interest
-therefore, harassment is not actionable in PN
Apart from Khorasandjian which other confirmed that C must have a proprietary interest for a claim to be successful in PN
-Hunter Canary Wharf
Which 2 cases held that C must have a proprietary interest for a claim in PN to be successful
- Khorasandjian
- Hunter v Canary Wharf
What did Lord Westbury hold in St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping
PN is acitionable where there is:
(i) material damage (e.g., damage to C’s trees);
(ii) interference with comfort and convenience (or amenity).
- where damage is material/ physical a remedy is likely to be granted
- where the claim is of comfort and convenience, courts will engage in a balancing exercise
-St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping: per Lord Westbury
Where C’s claim concerns comfort and convenience, courts will engage in …
a balancing exercise
what was held in Antrim Truck Centre Ltd v Ontario
that in all PN cases, courts will consider whether the interference was unreasonable
reasonableness case
Delaware Mansions Ltd v Westminster City Council
what is reasonableness concerned with
the outcome of D’s conduct
when we ask has C suffered harm- what do the courts engage in
a balancing exercise
when looking at whether there has been an interference with comfort and convenience what do the courts compare it to
how ordinary men and women may feel in that situation Laws v Florinplace
