Nuisance

Question 1

What is the definition of private nuisance?

Answer 1

An unlawful, indirect interference with another person’s use or enjoyment of land, or their rights over it.

Question 2

What are the 2 types of interference in private nuisance?

Answer 2

There’s a difference between a nuisance causing physical damage, and one causing interference with comfort or enjoyment of land, but both must be indirect and unreasonable (HALSEY V ESSO PETROLEUM).

Question 3

What must the claimant have to have an action in the tort of private nuisance?

Answer 3

C must have a proprietary interest in the land affected, (HUNTER v CANARY WHARF), which they do because they (e.g. are the owner)

Question 4

IF RELEVANT: Who cannot make a claim?

Answer 4

A guest or family member cannot claim as they do not have a proprietary interest.

Question 5

What must D be in order to be responsible for a nuisance?

Answer 5

D need not cause the interference or have an interest in the land affected, (SEDLEIGH v DENFIELD v O’CALLAGHAN) but must be the occupier of the land, either as the owner (TETLEY v CHITTY), or by having control or possession of the land.

Question 6

What are the examples of actions that constitute a nuisance?

Answer 6

Examples of what amounts to a nuisance are: heat/light/dust (HALSEY v ESSO PETROLEUM), noise and vibrations (STURGES v BRIDGMAN), noisy neighbours (COVENTRY v LAWRENCE) and smells (ADAMS v URSELL).

Question 7

How does the court determine if D’s interference is unreasonable?

Answer 7

The court will consider the competing interests of C and D, and will consider several factors when deciding whether D’s interference is unreasonable and therefore unlawful.

Question 8

How does the character of an area influence whether an interference is unreasonable?

Answer 8

The LOCALITY i.e. character of the area, can make an interference unreasonable. As stated in STURGES v BRIDGMAN, “what would be a nuisance in Belgrave Square would not necessarily be so in Bermondsey”. In LAWS v FLORINPLACE a sex shop was unreasonable in a residential area.

Question 9

How can social utility affect whether an interference is considered reasonable?

Answer 9

SOCIAL UTILITY may make an interference more reasonable, where the activity benefits the public, as with a cricket club in MILLER v JACKSON, although in ADAMS v URSELL a fish and chip shop did not have social utility. It won’’t prevent liability, but could be taken into account when deciding the remedy.

Question 10

How does the duration of interference affect its legality?

Answer 10

The DURATION of the interference must usually be regular and ongoing to be unreasonable, as in DE KEYSER’S HOTEL v SPICER BROS, although even a 20 minute firework display was held to be a nuisance in CROWN RIVER CRUISES v KIMBOLTON FIREWORKS.

Question 11

How does malice by the defendant affect a nuisance claim?

Answer 11

MALICE shown by the defendant when deliberately disturbing the claimant will make the interference unreasonable, as in HOLLYWOOD SILVER FOX FARM v EMMET.

Question 12

How does particular sensitivity of the claimant affect a nuisance claim?

Answer 12

PARTICULAR SENSITIVITY of the claimant, where the interference was unreasonable, will make the interference more reasonable, as in NETWORK RAIL v MORRIS.

Question 13

How does the seriousness of the interference affect liability in nuisance claims?

Answer 13

The SERIOUSNESS of the interference will be considered. If it is very serious or severe, it is more likely to be unreasonable. In MILLER v JACKSON the interference of the cricket balls was infrequent, so less serious.

Question 14

What is Statutory Authority, and how does it apply as a defence in nuisance cases?

Answer 14

STATUTORY AUTHORITY may be a defence, where the interference is authorised by a law/statue, (ALLEN v GULF OIL REFINING). Local authority planning permission can be taken into account, but cannot provide an absolute defence, as in COVENTRY v LAWRENCE.

Question 15

What is the Prescription defence in nuisance cases?

Answer 15

PRESCRIPTION may be a defence, where the nuisance has been “uniformly created” by the defendant as an “actionable nuisance” for the specific claimant for over 20 years, as in STURGES v BRIDGMAN, and in COVENTRY v LAWRENCE. It must be the nuisance complained of, not the activity generally, which must be considered.

Question 16

Can a claimant moving to a nuisance be used as a defence?

Answer 16

D may try to argue that C ‘moved to the nuisance’, and so shouldn’t be allowed to disrupt the activity of the established resident. But, as held in MILLER v JACKSON, this is no defence. It may only be a defence if C changes the use of their property so that it is basically their own fault.

Question 17

How can the Act of a Stranger be a defence in a nuisance claim?

Answer 17

ACT OF A STRANGER may be a defence, where the interference occurred because of the actions of someone over which the defendant had no control, (SEDLEIGH DENFIELD v O’CALLAGHAN).

Question 18

When should damages be awarded instead of an injunction in nuisance cases?

Answer 18

DAMAGES may be awarded (MILLER v JACKSON). In COVENTRY v LAWRENCE it was held that damages should now be awarded in preference to an injunction, especially where local authority landing permission has been granted, or as public policy issue where there is a public benefit e.g. the activity provides jobs.

Question 19

What is a prohibitory injunction, and when is it used in nuisance cases?

Answer 19

An INJUNCTION may be ordered. A PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION prevents D from continuing with the use of land completely, or a PARTIAL INJUNCTION limits part of the activity or timing of it (KENNAWAY v THOMPSON).

Question 20

How do human rights factor into nuisance claims?

Answer 20

The HUMAN RIGHTS of the claimant will be considered if there is a violation of ARTICLE 8 OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, which protects the right to a private family life, as in MARCIC v THAMES WATER.