Private Nuisance Flashcards
What is the introduction to nuisance?
People have a right to do what they want in their own home provided it is reasonable and doesn’t annoy their neighbours.
Tort law provides the possibility of a claim if the action continues beyond what is reasonable as this would be a nuisance.
What actions can be classes as unreasonable and what is private nuisance?
Loud noises
Fumes
Obstructive building
Smells
We’re someone’s use or enjoyment of their property is affected by unreasonable behaviour of a neighbour.
What is the case for indirect and direct nuisance?
For a successful private nuisance case the interference can be indirect eg smoke, smell, noise
( Halsey V Esso Petroleum)
The interference can also be direct eg the roots of a tree growing into the neighbouring property causing damage to your property foundation.
Is physical damage considered a nuisance?
(Case)
If there is physical damage then it’s likely to be a nuisance this would be a prima Facie nuisance (obvious)
(St Helens V Tipping)
What can and cannot you claim for under private nuisance ?
(Case)
You can claim for property damage
You cannot claim for personal injury
(Malone V Laskey)
Parties in a private nuisance case
What reason does a claimant have to have to sue under PN?
C must have an interest in the land eg owner or tenant
Their use or enjoyment of the land is affected by the interference.
Traditionally a member of the owner’s family can not claim if they don’t have an interest in the land (Hunter V Canary Wharf)
However, if the owner was affected by the interference he can claim on their behalf.
An exception to this rule is the case of Mckenna V British Alumni we’re the children were affected by the fumes and smells but had no interest in the land
However, we’re able to claim as the nuisance breached Article 8 of the HRA 1998 right to protect family life at home.
What role does the Defendant have in PN case?
D is the person who is causing the nuisance
The D doesn’t have to have an interest in the land eg a member of the owner’s family
This can be a local authority (Tetley V Chitty)
The Occupier can still be liable if they did not create the nuisance but failed to deal with it this could be something that a trespasser or a previous owner did
(Sedleigh Denfield V O’Callaghan)
In Leakey V National Trust it was held that D were liable as they knew that the slippage might happen and failed to prevent it
What question does the courts raise when deciding if the interference is Unlawful?
The question for the court is whether it’s reasonable for claimant to have to suffer the particular interference.
What are the cases for unlawful?
Hunter V Canary Wharf held the HOL decided that this was not an unlawful nuisance.
Laws V Florinplace held that the residents were able to claim nuisance when shops houses and restaurants in the area were converted onto sex shops.
Thomas - Schwab V costaki held that running a brothel was a nuisance.
Fearn and Others V Tate Gallary held- the HC held in favour of the TATE. The COA dismissed the appeal as overlooking does not fall into a nuisance as we have no right to a view. The courts suggested to close the curtain or move room. SC overturned the judgement by the lower court and held that the Tates viewing platform was a legal nuisance.
What do the courts do if the nuisance is not Prima Facie? List the 4 factors?
The course will have to establish reasonableness.
Locality
Duration of the interference
Sensitivity of the claimant
Malice
What is the definition of locality and its cases?
The character of the neighbourhood will be considered to establish whether the nuisance is reasonable for example the type of area is it residential, commercial, town or countryside. The change can be unreasonable.
Kennaway V Thompson held - claimant was successful for her claim of private nuisance as there was noise,parking issues therefore the character of the neighbourhood was changed.
However if there is physical damage even if the character of the neighbourhood hasn’t changed there will still be a nuisance (St Helens V Tipping)
What is the definition of duration of the interference and its cases?
In order for it to be unreasonable the interference usually needs to be continuous and at unreasonable times of the day.
(Crown River Cruises Ltd V Kimbolton Fireworks Ltd held a 20 min firework display was held to be a nuisance.)
What is the definition of sensitivity of the claimant and it’s cases?
It is not reasonable for the defendant to be liable if the claimant is particularly sensitive
The courts will now look at the foreseeability of the interference
Network Rail Infrastructure V Morris held - the Court of Appeal decided that interference from a new track circuit with nearby sensitive guitar equipment was not foreseeable so the defendants were not liable
What is the definition of Malice and it’s cases?
A deliberately harmful act (direct nuisance) will normally be considered unreasonable behaviour.
Hollywood Silver Fox Farm V Emmett held - shooting the gun near the links was a deliberately harmful act and therefore it’s unreasonable so it was a nuisance.
