Nuisance Flashcards
HUNTER v CANARY WHARF: Private nuisance was stratified into three sub sections, what are they?
Nuisance by encroachment.
By direct harm to the land.
Interference with the quiet enjoyment of the land.
Private nuisance is defined as what and in which case?
BAMFORD v TURNLEY: any continuous activity or state of affairs causing a substantial and unreasonable interference with a claimants land.
Clarified in HUNTER v CANARY WHARF.
How is it determined if a claimant is able to sue in private nuisance/rylands?
MALONE v LASKEY: need a legal interest in the land.
Confirmed in Hunter: & spouses who have beneficial interest will be able to sue.
DOBSON v THAMES WATER: if no legal interest can potentially sue under HRA.
How do you determine if the defendant can be sued under private nuisance?
THOMAS v NUM: the creator of the nuisance even if not the occupier.
LEAKEY v NATIONAL TRUST: the occupier in the land. MATANIA v N.P BANK: may be liable for contractor if employed for a specific task that creates a foreseeable nuisance. OR: SEDLEIGH-DENFIELD v O’CALLAGHAN: for trespassers if they have adopted the nuisance and not steps to abate have been taken.
TETLEY v CHITTY: landlords if lease is given for the nuisance in question.
GOLDMAN v HARGRAVE: for natural nuisances if they are foreseeable and should have mitigated.
Under what circumstances can an occupier of land be sued for nuisance?
LEAKEY v NATIONAL TRUST:
MATANIA v NP BANK: liable for a contractor if employed for a specific task that creates a foreseeable nuisance.
SEDLEIGH-DENFIELD v O’CALLAGHAN: for trespassers if they have adopted the nuisance and taken no steps to abate.
Under what circumstances can a landlord be sued for private nuisance?
If the lease is granted by them for the specific nuisance in question.
When can a defendant be sued for natural nuisances?
GOLDMAN v HARGRAVE: if foreseeable and should have mitigated.
What are the three elements of private nuisance?
INDIRECT INTERFERENCE
DAMAGE
UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE
What has been judicially recognised as indirect interference?
SEDLEIGH-DENFIELD: flood of water.
BLISS v HALL: smell/fumes.
BONE v SEALE: smell from farm.
HALSEY v ESSO: vibrations and damage to clothes from acid.
SOLLOWAY v HAMPSHIRE: tree roots sucking moisture.
STURGES v BRIDGMAN: Noise.
NOT TV RECEPTION: HUNTER.
What was the actionable direct interference in SEDLEIGH-DENFIELD?
Flood of water.
What was the actionable direct interference in BLISS v HALL?
Smell/fumes.
What was the actionable direct interference in BONE v SEALE?
Smell from a farm.
What was the actionable direct interference in HALSEY v ESSO?
Vibrations and damage to clothes from acid.
What was the actionable direct interference in SOLLOWAY v HAMPSHIRE?
Tree roots sucking moisture.
What was the actionable direct interference in STURGES v BRIDGMAN?
Noise.
What type of damage is recoverable?
CAMBRIDGE WATER v EAST COUNTIES LEATHER: that which is reasonably foreseeable.
NOT PERSONAL INJURY: HUNTER.
St HELENS SMELTING v TIPPING: 2 types of recoverable damage:
PHYSICAL PROPERTY DAMAGE (as in LEMMON v WEBB: overhanging trees).
Sensible personal discomfort: SPD: Horsey & Rackey call ‘amenity damage’.
Which case holds that only damage that is reasonably foreseeable is recoverable?
CAMBRIDGE WATER v EAST COUNTIES LEATHER.
Which case colds you cannot claim for personal injury in nuisance?
HUNTER v CANARY WHARF
Which case distinguished between the two types of damage recoverable (SPD & physical property damage)?
ST HELENS SMELTING v TIPPING.
What does ‘unlawful interference’ mean?
Unreasonableness: BAMFORD v TURNLEY: a rule of give and take between neighbours; balance up factors to determine.
What factors are relevant when considering unlawful interference?
AREA/LOCALITY. DURATION. ABNORMAL SENSITIVITY OF PROPERTY/CLAIMANT. PUBLIC BENEFIT. MALICE. MOVING TO THE NUISANCE.
AREA/LOCALITY is relevant how?
ST HELENS SMELTING v TIPPING: irrelevant if property damage!
STURGES v BRIDGMAN: belgravia/bermondsey.
LAWS v FLORINPLACE: sex shop.
WHEELER v JJ SAUNDERS: planning permission doesn’t authorise a nuisance, but it may alter the character of an area: GILLINGHAM v MEDWAY. Note: WATSON v CROFT: this isnt invoked lightly.
Which case holds that locality is irrelevant for property damage?
ST HELENS
Which case holds that planning permission does not authorise a nuisance?
WHEELER v JJ SAUNDERS: but it may:
GILLINGHAM v MEDWAY: alter the character of an area.
Note: WATSON v CROFT.
DURATION impacts on unlawful interference how?
KENNAWAY v THOMPSON: the longer it goes on for the more chance of it being a nuisance.
Contract BOLTON v STONE to CASTLE v ST AUGUSTINE (golf).
One-off events? BRITISH CELANESE: foil onto land, power-outage. SPICER v SMEE: where one event caused a long term nuisance (faulty wires).
Distinguish from CROWN RIVER CRUISES v KIMBOLTON: one off event a nuisance even if no long term issue.
Which case holds that the longer something goes on for the more likely it is to be a nuisance?
KENNAWAY v THOMPSON
BOLTON v STONE & CASTLE v ST AUGUSTINE can be contrasted to what effect?
Bolton: cricket balls rarely escape.
Augustine: golf balls all the time.
What cases discuss how one-off events may be nuisances?
BRITISH CELANESE: foil causing power failures.
SPICER v SMEE: fire causing persistent faulty wires.
Contrast: CROWN RIVER CRUISES v KIMBOLTON: fireworks.
ABNORMAL SENSITIVITY OF PROPERTY/CLAIMANT impacts upon unlawful interference how?
ROBINSON v KILVERT: heat sensitive paper; ordinary paper wouldn’t have been affected and so no nuisance.
So, unless an ordinary person is affected there is no nuisance. If, however, a reasonable person could claim then so can the abnormally sensitive one: MCKINNON v WALKER; orchids.
NETWORK RAIL v MORRIS: rail interference with electric equipment.
ROBINSON v KILVERT holds what re: abnormal sensitivity?
If an ordinary person/property wouldn’t be affected then there is no nuisance.
Unless, a reasonable person could claim- then so could the abnormally sensitive one: MCKINNON v WALKER.
How does a PUBLIC BENEFIT impact upon unlawful interference?
ADAMS v URSELL: public benefit doesn’t necessarily negate a nuisance, e.g. BELLOWAY v IRISH CEMENT.
But will impact upon remedy: partial rather than full injunction: KENNAWAY v THOMPSON, or else merely damages and no injunction: MILLER v JACKSON, or very rarely damages in lieu of an injunction: WATSON v CROFT.
MALICE impacts upon unlawful interference in what way?
It is not necessary to prove it for a claim, but it can be influential.
Generally defeats reasonableness:
HOLLYWOOD SILVER FOX v EMMETT.
CHRISTIE v DAVEY.
How does MOVING TO THE NUISANCE impact upon unlawful interference?
BLISS v HALL & STURGES v BRIDGMAN: moving to nuisance does not justify the nuisance.
Which defences are available to a private nuisance claim?
PRESCRIPTION: if defendant has carried it out for 20 years and the claimant hasn’t brought an action during that time. STURGES v BRIDGMAN: only after it was an extension was it a nuisance and so the defence wasnt allowed.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: provided all due care is taken and the nuisance is an inevitable consequence. e.g. ALLEN v GULF OIL.
Note: permissions/permits are not a defence: WHEELER/BARR v BIFFA.
VOLENTI.
CONTRIB NEG.
What remedies are available for a private nuisance claim?
DAMAGES: DENNIS v MOD, as of right; awarded difference in house price.
FULL OR PARTIAL INJUNCTION: KENNAWAY v THOMPSON: equitable so maxims apply.
ABATEMENT: LEMMON v WEBB.
Who can sue for a RYLANDS v FLETCHER claim?
TRANSCO v STOCKPORT: same as for private law;
Creator: THOMAS v NUM
Occupier in certain circumstances: LEAKEY v NT.
What are the required elements for a rylands claim?
BRINGS/ACCUMULATES SOMETHING ONTO THE LAND.
FOR MISCHIEF.
WHICH IS A NON NATURAL USE.
WHICH THEN ESCAPES.
AND THE ESCAPE CAUSING DAMAGE IS FORESEEABLE.
DAMAGE.
The first element is that something is brought onto or accumulated on the land, which case holds this?
GILES v WALKER: thistles grew naturally so no tort.
What does ‘for mischief’ mean?
DANGEROUS: or something non-dangerous that escapes in a way that makes it dangerous.
RAINHAM v BELVEDERE: acid.
READ v LYONS: explosives.
CAMBRIDGE WATER: chemicals in water.
How must an ‘ESCAPE’ occur?
From somewhere the defendant has control to somewhere they don’t: READ v LYONS.
What is a ‘non-natural use of the land’?
RICKARDS v LOVIATHAN: must be some special use bringing with it increased danger.
TRANSCO: water pipes considered ‘natural’ so rylands didnt apply.
In what way must the damage be foreseeable for a Ryland’s claim?
CAMBRIDGE WATER: the escape itself need not be foreseeable, only that an escape could cause damage.
Can personal injury be claimed for in Rylands?
No.
What defences are available to a Ryland’s claim?
VOLENTI: can be implied if the substance accumulated for a common benefit between C & D: PETERS v PRINCE OF WALES.
CONTRIB NEG.
STAT AUTHORITY.
ACT OF STRANGER: as in RYLANDS v FLETCHER: if they had no control over the third party.
What is the definition of public nuisance?
A-G v PYA QUARRIES: an act that materially affects the reasonable comfort of life of a class of Her Majesty’s subjects.
It is a crime but can occasionally become a tort. Most such obstructions are now governed by statute, but situations such as obstructing the highway can still fall under this banner.
Further still, can be one-off events, so long as they are material.
When is a public nuisance claim actionable as a tort?
If the C suffers damage over and above other memders of the public: need special damage.
LYONS v GULLIVER: queue outside shop.
TATE LYLE v GLC: only one company affected in this specific way but successful claim because the interference impacted others in a different way.
How big need the class of people affected?
A-G v HASTINGS: no exact number of people who need to be affected; facts depend on the case; can sue as an individual WITHIN a class.
Can personal injury be recovered in public nuisance?
ROSE v MILES: yes, and pure economic loss.
What case examples are there of public nuisance?
AG v ORANGE: pop festival.
THOMAS v NUM: picketing highway.
WANDSWORTH v TRACK: pigeons.
