Nuisance Flashcards
Ingredients?
Act / omission which amounts to:
Unreasonable interference with
Disturbance of
Annoyance to
.. a person in excercise of his rights to property
Public Nuisance?
A/O which materially affects reasonable comfort of public
Smith v Wilson 1903 - only AG may bring action
Why can only AG bring action for public Nuisance?
Coppinger v Sheehan 1906: only special/ particular damage
Rational dubious as does not apply in PN
Runs contrary to mainstream of Tort law, particularly negligence
What are special / particular damages PN?
Uncertainty
Hickey v electric reduction Canada 1970: injury must be different in kind rather than degree
More popular view where P’s injury more serious than public
Boyd v GNR 1895 (doctor)
Boyd reaffirmed in Clifford
What is Private nuisance?
Royal Dublin Society v Yates 1997: PN consists of any interference without lawful justification with use/ enjoyment of property
Must have interest in land, Cunard v Antifyre 1933
Private Nuisance: Material Damage?
Two ways: omission by D to alleviate/ commissioning of positive act by D
Lynch v Hetherton 1991 (omission): rotten trees
Hoare v Mcalpine (act): more stricter approach, C focus on balance (vibrations from blasting)
Compensation Ireland / England?
EC strong emphasis on loss of amenity value (Hunter v Canary Wharf) & restricted range of claimants
Not reflected in IC ( may be affected by need to vindicate constitutional rights)
Continuing Nuisance?
Leo Larkin v Iqbal Joosub 2006 D deemed concurrent wrongdoers under s11 Civil Liability act 1961
D’s cumulative negligence caused damage establishing this
Private nuisance: interference with use?
“Personal inconvenience & interferes with enjoyment, quiet, freedom, anything that affects senses of nerves”
St Helens smelting v Tipping 1865
Private Nuisance: Concept of reasonableness?
Central theme in tort
Broad Criterion: common sense approach
Judged “according to ordinary uses of mankind living in particular society” per Lord wright in OCallaghan 1940
Interference with use: Causation?
Graham v Rechem provides example of practical problems in establishing causation (waste incinerator / cattle)
Case failed on causation as other possible explanations of cattle’s injuries
(Owen Mcintrye)
Interference with use: locality?
Environment will have effect whether considered unreasonable
O’Kane v Campell 1985: issue of how locality should be characterised (24 hour shop)
Locality: relationship between planning permission & nuisance?
Complex issue in IC: hint at judicial differences regarding weight of PP
Cork CoCo v Slattery 2008 (operating within planning permission doesn’t justify harm to neighbours)
Kelly v Simpson 2008 (PP may alter what constitutes nuisance, parties may have to tolerate changes)
Lanigan v Barry 2008 (PP expanded beyond reasonable scope)
Private Nuisance: Public Convenience?
Judicial opinions diverge on PC in assessing reasonableness
Bellew v Cement ltd 1948 (WW2 cement shortage) CJ maguire opposed view, prioritising private rights
Clifford v Drug Treatment 1998: more civic minded approach (balance societal needs with individual rights)
Who can sue for private nuisance?
Close analysis by IC/ EC
Traditionally accepted occupier / tenant may sue
Hunter v Canary Wharf 1997 HOL refused to permit Licensee
IC not persuaded: Royal Society v Yeats supported more flexible approach
Reaffirmed Molumby v Kearns 1999
