Private Nuisance Flashcards
what is private nuisance?
an unlawful interference for a substantial length of time with a person’s right to enjoy or use his land in a reasonable way.
actionable in tort, definition not set in stone
what does private nuisance concern?
concerns people living in proximity to each other
what are the main types of private nuisance?
loss of amenity nuisance
material damage nuisance
what is loss of amenity nuisance?
no physical damage
c’s ability to enjoy land is restricted by activities of D
e.g. noise preventing sleep, smell, smoke
what is material damage nuisance?
when dangerous state of affairs on D’s land causes significant physical damage to C’s land
e.g. tree roots causing subsidence
when does D’s use of land become a problem?
when use is termed unreasonable.
when it affects nieghbours’ ability to enjoy his/her land
who are the parties to an action?
anyone who uses or enjoys land and is affected by interference may claim.
C must have an interest in the land, e.g. owner/tenant
can’t be member of owner’s family who has no legal interest in property
parties to an action, D?
person who is causing or allowing the nuisance can be sued
Tetley v Chitty (1986) (local authority allowed go-kart racing that caused nuisance)
Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan (1940)
occupier who knows of a danger and allows it to continue is liable, even if he/she has not created danger themselves
where occupier is not responsible for creating nuisance, still liable as a result of ‘adopting’ the nuisance
Sedleigh Denfield v O’callaghan
failing to deal with problem is liable
natural causes?
D can be liable where nuisance is the result of natural causes which he/she is aware of but fails to deal with.
Leaky v National trust (1980)
leaky v national trust and natural causes?
natural mound on hillside, D aware that this could slip so liable when it slipped onto C’s land, failed to prevent this
does D have to have an interest in the land?
D does not have to have an interest in the land from which nuisance is coming.
Anthony v The coal authority
Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd
loss of recreational facility is not sufficient interference to give rise to an action in nuisance
Balancing conflicting interests
McKenna v British Aluminium- 3o C’s, some of which had no interest in the land, were able to claim for fumes from D’s factory
Article 8
what are the elements of private nuisance?
- an unlawful inteference
- for substantial length of time
- of person’s right to enjoy or use land in a reasonable way
- unlawful?
mere interference is unsufficient for an action
does not mean illegal but courts accept that D’s use of land is unreasonable in way it effects C
- what types of interference will not be allowed?
right to view of countryside
right to light
interference to TV reception
- do courts protect feelings of emotional distress?
Thompson-shwab v costaki
running brothel in respectable, residential area = nuisance
factors of reasonableness?
courts will assess factors of reasonableness in deciding whether 's use of land is unreasonable locality duration time of day malice sensitivity social benefit
locality
character of neighborhood will be considered, is it residential, commercial, industrial, town, country?
sturges vBridgman
duration
to be actionable, inteference will be continuous and carried on at unreasonable hours of day
crown river cruises v kimbolton fireworks (20 mins held to be nuisance)
sensitivity of C
if C is particularly sensitive, action may not be nuisance
robinson v kilvert
however, law is moving on from idea of ‘abnormal sensitivity’ to test of foreseeability
network rail v morris
malice
deliberately harmful act is unreasonable so nuisance
Hollywood silver fox farm v emmett
social benefit
if D is providing benefit to community, courts consider actions reasonable
miller v jackson
defence of prescription
if D can show they’ve been committing nuisance for 20+ years and C has been aware and done nothing about it, D has a defence
coventry v lawrence
defence of moving to nuisance
not a defence to D,
C is only suffering nuisance as they moved closer or into the area
miller v jackson
defence of statutory authority
nuisance by public authority acting under statutory powers, this is a defence providing nuisance doesn’t exceed what was authorised
remedy, injunction
ordering D to stop causing nuisance or providing instruction
remedy abatement
entering D’s property to prevent further nuisance e.g. chopping overhanging branches
