Private Nuisance^ Flashcards
Description
an unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land
claimant must have an interest in the land
Aim
aim to balance between neighbours affecting the enjoyment of land and people having a right to do what they want with their land
Hunter V Canary Wharf Ltd
only those wit an interest in the land can claim not members of their family
Nuisance
interference becomes unlawful
unlawful = unreasonable in how affects claimant
can be fumes, smoke, noise, vibrations, smell
Thomson Schwab V Costaki
brothals as an example of nuisance
Laws V Florinplace Ltd
sex shop can amount to a nuisance
Factors To Be Unreasonable
duration
sensitivity
locality
malice
social benefit
Crown River Cruises V Fireworks
take account of duration
even if its only temp, its not enough to avoid a claim
Network Rail Infrastructure V Morris
sensitivity of the claimant is a factor
nuisance only affected because sensitivity, so its not be considered to be unreasonable
Sturges V Bridgeman For Factors
locality is a factor
what could be a nuisance in Belgrave Square would not necessarily be so in Bermondsey
Hollywood Silver Fox Farm V Emmett
malice is a factor
nuisance done with malice so its unreasonable
Miller V Jackson
social benefit outweights the nuisance of the claimant so its not unreasonable
Who May Be Sued?
anyone who is causing the nuisance
even with no interest in the land
occupier may not be liable not because they caused it but that failed to fix it
Prescription
if actions has been carried out for 20+ years then they have the right to continue
Sturges V Bridgeman For Prescription
prescriptive right to continue only applies if that nuisance existed for that time
