Private Nuisance

Question 1

Hunter v Canary Wharf (C is able to sue D)

Answer 1

C must have legal rights in the land to sue

Question 2

Tetley v Chitty

Answer 2

D can only be sued if they are the creator of the nuisance, or the owner or occupier of the land

Question 3

Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan

Answer 3

Physical damage from things can be indirect intereference

Question 4

Christie v Davey (indirect interference)

Answer 4

Indirect interference can come from physical things or non-physical things like noise

Question 5

Wheeler v Saunders (indirect interference)

Answer 5

Indirect interference can come from non-physical things like smell

Question 6

Leakey v National Trust

Answer 6

A continuing nuisance can occur where D doesn’t create a nuisance, but doesn’t take steps to prevent or fix damage caused from their land

Question 7

Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Morris

Answer 7

The court should consider if C was only affected due to abnormal sensitivity

Question 8

AG v Doughty

Answer 8

Blocking a view does not count as interference as this is just a ‘thing of delight’

Question 9

Hunter v Canary Wharf (common and ordinary use)

Answer 9

Recreational activities are not valid things that can be interfered with under nuisance

Question 10

Halsey v Esso Petroleum (substantial interference)

Answer 10

Non-physical interference is substantial if it makes it physically unpleasant to be on the land

Question 11

Fearn v Tate Gallery

Answer 11

An unlawful interference is one that goes beyond common and ordinary usage

Question 12

Sturges v Bridgman (common and ordinary)

Answer 12

We should consider the type of area to decide if the use is common and ordinary for the locality

Question 13

Halsey v Esso Petroleum (common and ordinary)

Answer 13

We should consider the duration and timing of the use to see if it is common and ordinary

Question 14

Crown River Cruises Tld. v Kimbolton Fireworks Ltd

Answer 14

Even short interferences can be uncommon if severe enough

Question 15

Christie v Davey (common and ordinary)

Answer 15

If D is using the land with bad intentions, this malice will make the use uncommon

Question 16

Sturges v Bridgman (defence)

Answer 16

Defence of prescription, where it must have been a nuisance to C for at least 20 years

Question 17

Wheeler v Saunders (defence)

Answer 17

Defence of planning permission, which gives D a chance to prove their use has become common and ordinary for the locality

Question 18

Coventry v Lawrence

Answer 18

Damages