Nuisance

Question 1

What is private nuisance?

Answer 1

It protects a person’s enjoyment and use of the land

It’s aim is to achieve a compromise between the parties in order for each party to be free to enjoy their land as they so wish.

They do need to take into account the reasonable needs of their neighbour.

Question 2

Kennaway v Thompson (1981)

Answer 2

Limiting the time and duration of the nuisance in order to meet the needs of a reasonable neighbour.

The test for whether activity is lawful is reasonableness

It is the leading case in awarding an injunction against that of damages.

Question 3

Halsey v Esso Petroleum (1961)

Answer 3

When an action caused physical damage it is automatically unreasonable

When the harm complaint of is inconvenience or discomfort (e.g noise and smell) the court looks at a number of factors in order to determine whether it is reasonable.

Question 4

St. Helens Smelting v Tipping (1865)

Answer 4

To succeed in private nuisance a Claimant must show:

• that damage has been suffered
• that the interference is unlawful

Question 5

Private nuisance can be claimed in which two forms?

Answer 5

• Indirect physical damage to property
• loss of amenity (loss of comfort) in the claimant’s use of the land. This does not include personal injury

Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd (1997)

Question 6

Sturges v Bridgman (1879)

Answer 6

Is the noise of a reasonable type and level in the context of neighbourhood

Question 7

Robinson v Kilvert (1889)

Answer 7

The use of the land is sensitive i.e. is the activity specialist and unreasonable in the circumstances.

Question 8

McKinnon Industries Ltd v Walker (1951)

Answer 8

This does not prevent the Defendant from being liable if the interference is such as would foreseeably affected an ordinary user of the land.

Question 9

Andrea v Selfridge and Co (1938)

Answer 9

Building works, there will inevitably be some interference with the use an enjoyment of neighbouring properties, but if the works are carried out with reasonable skill and care no actionable nuisance has been committed.

Is the amount of noise material/substantial, rather than merely irritating? (Halsey v Esso Petroleum)

Question 10

Tetley v Chitty (1986)

Answer 10

Landlord will generally not be found liable in nuisances cases due to parting way with the land.

They can however be found liable should they be aware of the reason for the letting i.e. to put on a music festival therefore the landlord has expressly or implied agreed to the nuisance.

Question 11

Shelfer v City of London Lighting (1895)

Answer 11

Leading case in which the court awarded damages instead of an injunction against the Defendant.

Question 12

Rylands v Fletcher (1868)

Answer 12

If something is brought onto land that is likely to do mischief escapes, then the person who is in possession of the land will be ‘prima facie’ liable for all the damage that is a natural consequence of its escape.

Question 13

Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather plc (1994)

Answer 13

Considers foreseeability of harm / was the leak in Rylands foreseeable?

Question 14

Reed v J Lyon and Co Ltd (1947)

Answer 14

Defines non-natural use of the land

It must be some special use that brings with it increased danger to others and must not be ordinary use of the land.