Private Nuisance Flashcards
definition
“an unlawful, indirect interference with another person’s use or enjoyment of land, or their rights over it.”
Hunter v Canary Wharf
c must have proprietary interest in the land affected
Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan
- d need not cause the interference
- D3: act of a stranger, where the interference occurred because of the actions of someone over which d had no control
Tetley v Chitty
d must be the occupier of the land, either as the owner
Halsey v Esso Petroleum
- e.gs: noise/vibrations/heat/light/dust
- ‘prima facie’ nuisance, causing physical damage
Sturges v Blackman
- e.gs: noise & vibrations
- F1: locality, ie character of the area can make int unr (Thesiger LJ)
- D3: prescription, where the nuisance has been ‘uniformly created’ by the d as an ‘actionable nuisance’ for the c (CvL)
Adams v Ursell
- e.g smells
- F2: social utility, x fish and chip shop
Thesiger LJ
F1; locality “what would be a nuisance in belgrave square would not necessarily be so in bermondsey”
Laws v Florinplace
F1: locality, sex shop in residential area
Kennaway v Thompson
- F1: locality, speed boats in quiet lake area
- D2: partial injunction limits part of the activity/timing
Miller v Jackson
- F2: social utility, where the activity benefits the public eg cricket club
- F6: seriousness, cricket balls were infrequent
- D2: xdef to say c ‘moved to the nuisance’
- R1: damages
De Keyser’s Hotel v Spicer Bros
-F3: duration, usually regular and ongoing
Crown River Cruises v Kimbolton Fireworks
F3: duration, 20 min firework display
Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett
F4: malice, when deliberately disturbing c
Network Rail v Morris
F5: particular sensitivity of c, where interference was unforeseeable
Allen v Gulf Oil Refining
D1: statutory authority, where interference is authorised by a law/statute
Coventry v Lawrence
- e.g: noisy neighbours
- D1: statutory authority, partial for local authority pp
- D2: prescription
- R1: damages, in preference to injunction esp LAPP
Lemmon v Webb
R3: abatement, defence which allows the suffering party to remove the n w/o legal p (branches)
Marcic v Thames Water
R4: human right, if violation of a8 of ECH, which protects the right to a private family life
Factors
1) locality SvB, LvF, KvT
2) social utility MvJ, AvU
3) duration DKHvSB, CRCvKF
4) malice HSFFvE
5) particular sensitivity NRvM
6) seriousness MvJ
Defences
1) statutory authority AvGOR, CvL
2) prescription SvB, CvL, MvJ
3) act of a stranger SDvO’C
Remedies
1) damages MvJ, CvL
2) injunction KvT
3) abatement LvW
4) human rights a8 ECHR
F1: locality
character of the area, TLJ quote ( SvB), sex shop (LvF), speedboat races (KvT)
F2: social utility
where the activity benefits the public, cricket club (MvJ), x chippy (AvU)
F3: duration
must usually be regular and ongoing to be unr (DKHvSB) 20 min (CRCvKF)
F4: malice
show by d when deliberately disturbing the c (HSFFvE)
F5: particular sensitivity
of the c, where the interference was unforeseeablee
F6: seriousness
if it is very serious/severe (MvJ) infrequent cricket balls
D1: statutory authority
where the interference is authorised by a law/statute (AvGOR). lapp taken into account, not a full defence (CvL)
D2: prescription
where the nuisance has been ‘uniformly created’ by d as an ‘actionable nuisance for c for over 20yrs (SvB, CvL)
D3: act of a stranger
where the interference occurred bc of actions of someoneone over which d had no control (SDvO’C)
R1: damages
should be awarded in preference to an injunction, especially where lapp or public policy (MvJ, CvL)
R2: injunction
- prohibitory: prevents d continuing the use of land completely
- partial: limits part of activity or timing (KvT)
R3: abatement
allows the suffering party to remove n w/o legal proceedings eg branches (LvW)
R4: human rights
if a violation of a8 ECHR, which protects the right to a private family life (MvTW)
