Paper 2: public and private nuisance, rylands fletcher

Question 1

Nuisance: two types

Answer 1

Private and public

Question 2

Private nuisance: definition

Answer 2

A tort which deals with dispute between adjacent landowners which involved drawing a balance between the right of one person to use their land in whatever way they wish and the right of their neighbour not to be interfered with

Question 3

Private nuisance: 3 elements

Answer 3

1) An unreasonable use of land
2) Leading to an indirect interference
3) With the claimants use of enjoyment of land

Question 4

Private nuisance: who is D?

Answer 4

The ‘creator’ of the nuisance

Question 5

Private nuisance: who is an occupier (cases)

Answer 5

• Authorising the nuisance (Tetley v Chitty)

- Adopting the nuisance (Sedleigh v O’Callaghan)

Question 6

Private nuisance: Sedleigh v O’Callaghan

Answer 6

Held: as D knew of the nuisance/danger and allowed it to continue, D was held to have ‘adopted’ the nuisance and was liable for the damage

Question 7

Private nuisance: Leakey v National Trust (1980)

Answer 7

D, the National Trust were liable as they knew that it might happen and did not prevent it

Question 8

Private nuisance: factors to affect unreasonable use of the land

Answer 8

• Social benefit (Miller v Jackson)
• Duration (Bolton v Stone)
• Locality and time of day/week
• Malice (Christie v Davey)
• Sensitivity (Robinson v Kilvert)

Question 9

Private nuisance: second element to prove the unreasonable use of land

Answer 9

That it has led to an indirect interference

Question 10

Private nuisance: remote definition

Answer 10

The defend]ant is only liable for the damage if it is a reasonably forseeable consequence

Question 11

Private nuisance: The Wagon Mound

Answer 11

Held: the courts held that damage by the oil was foreseeable, but the damage by the fire was not and therefore was too remote

Question 12

Private nuisance: contributory negligence definition

Answer 12

Contributing to the nuisance they are complaining fo

Question 13

Private nuisance: Sayers v Harlow UDC

Answer 13

Facts: C tried to escape a locked toilet so stands on the toilet roll holder and was injured
Held: Damages reduced by 25%

Question 14

Private nuisance: 3 parts of consent

Answer 14

1) Knowledge and precise risk involved
2) Exercise of free choice by the claimant
3) A voluntary acceptance of the risk

Question 15

Private nuisance: Smith v Baker

Answer 15

Held: workman had already done all that he could in complaining about the risks involved in the work place above his head. He had no choice but to continue work and did not give his consent to the danger

Question 16

Private nuisance: what is the aim of damages?

Answer 16

To put C back into the position they were in before the damage/loss had occurred

Question 17

Private nuisance: why would C want to claim damages in private nuisance?

Answer 17

• Physical damage to the land
• Personal discomfort/inconvenience
• If property has diminished in value
• Loss of amenity

Question 18

Private nuisance: what is an injunction?

Answer 18

To stop D doing something or to make D do something

Question 19

Private nuisance: when would an injection be most effective

Answer 19

To stop a continuous nuisance

Question 20

Private nuisance: what is an abatement?

Answer 20

Where the claimant rectifies the nuisance himself and is a self-help remedy. The claimant has the right to take reasonable steps to deal with any nuisance himself

Question 21

Public nuisance: definition

Answer 21

‘…something which materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of life of a class of her Majesty’s subjects’

Question 22

Public nuisance: what was the case the definition was laid out in?

Answer 22

Attorney General v PYA Quarries

Question 23

Public nuisance: two elements

Answer 23

1) The nuisance must affect the public or a section of the public. This is known as a ‘class of people’
2) For an individual to bring an action in tort, he must suffer ‘special damage’ over and above that of other members of the public. The damage must be direct and substantial

Question 24

Public nuisance: examples

Answer 24

• Obstruction to a highway
• A protest
• Noise and traffic disruptions at a badly organised event

Question 25

Public nuisance: who can be prosecuted?

Answer 25

The creator of the nuisance

Question 26

Public nuisance: who can sue?

Answer 26

The council can do it on behalf of those affected, or by the AG after a criminal conviction

Question 27

Public nuisance: AG v PYA Quarries

Answer 27

• There is no minimum number to satisfy a ‘class of people’
• It was not a private nuisance as it is not reasonable to expect one person to take proceedings on his own
• D’s activities amounted to a public nuisance and an injunction was granted

Question 28

Public nuisance: special damages (cases)

Answer 28

1) Personal injury (Castles v St Augustine Links)
2) Property damage (Halsey v Esso Petroleum Co.Ltd)
3) Financial loss (Roles v Miles)

Question 29

Public nuisance: Castle v St Augustine Links (1922)

Answer 29

Facts: golf tee was near a public road and sometimes hit cars, on one occasion a taxi was hit breaking the windscreen and the driver had an eye injury 
Held: the golf club was found liable for public nuisance. The class of people were affected were car drivers who drove along the road, the claimant suffered special damage over and above that of the class

Question 30

Public nuisance: Corby Group Litigation v Corby Borough Council (2008)

Answer 30

Facts: toxic soil led to several children being born with broken limbs
Held: CA held that a public nuisance is not confined to loss of enjoyment of land, it is an unlawful act or omission which endangers the life, safety, health, proper or comfort of the public

Question 31

Rylands v Fletcher: facts

Answer 31

D was a mill owner who wanted to build a reservoir on his land and employed independent contractors to assess the land. The contractors discovered a disused mineshaft but believed it was filled with earth. Unknown to the D or the contractors, this mineshaft connected to the C’s coal mine on neighbouring land

Question 32

Rylands v Fletcher: held

Answer 32

When the reservoir was filled, water poured down the shaft and flooded the coal mine owned by C. D had not been negligent as he had taken care to select a competent and experiences independent contractor, yet he was liable for the damage to C’s land, creating a new tort

Question 33

Rylands v Fletcher: four elements

Answer 33

1) D brings something onto his land, collects and keeps it there/accumulates there (storage)
2) Non-Natural use of land
3) Likely to do mischief if it escaped
4) Which does escape and cause reasonable foreseeable damage to adjoining property

Question 34

Rylands v Fletcher: Giles v Walker (1890)

Answer 34

Facts: seeds from thistles blew onto neighbouring land, damaging the claimants crops
Held: the defendant was not liable as he had not brought the thistles onto his land; the weed was growing naturally

Question 35

Rylands v Fletcher: examples of non natural use of the land

Answer 35

• A fire in a grate spreads to C’s land
• Defective electric wiring that caused a fire which spread to C’s land
• A domestic water spread

Question 36

Rylands v Fletcher: Hale v Jennings Bros (1939)

Answer 36

Held: the owner of the ride was liable as the risk of the injury was foreseeable if the car came loose. This was an escape for the purposes of Ryland and Fletcher, D liable for personal injury

Question 37

Rylands v Fletcher: there must be an escape

Answer 37

‘Escape from a place where the D has occupation or control over land to a place which is outside his occupation or control’

Question 38

Rylands v Fletcher: Read v Lyons

Answer 38

Held: Explosion did not involve an escape because it stayed inside the factory, so the claim under Rylands by the injured inspector failed

Question 39

Rylands v Fletcher: Stannard v Gore (2013)

Answer 39

Held: the CA outline the rules of Rylands and Fletcher again and interpreted ‘escape’ narrowly