Private Nuisance

Question 1

nuisance intro and definition

Answer 1

• The C may be able to sue the D for nuisance due to…
• Private nuisance is the “Unlawful (unreasonable) interference with a persons use or enjoyment of land”. The focus is on whether the interference is unreasonable- If so, it will be a nuisance and will be actionable.

Question 2

Nuisance stage 1

Answer 2

• We first must establish the relevant parties to a claim. The claimant must demonstrate an appropriate legal interest in the land affected (Hunter vs Canary Wharf)- they are usually the owner or the tenant.
• The D is the creator of the nuisance. He does not need to own or occupy the land that the nuisance is emitting from. It does not matter if the D has taken reasonable care to not be a nuisance. In Cambridge Water, Lord Goff said,” The fact that the defendant has taken reasonable care will not exonerate him”.
  -Side rule- This could also be a local authority (Jones Ltd vs Portsmouth City Council)

Question 3

Nuisance stage 2 intro and summary

Answer 3

-There are four key factors to decide whether the interference is considered as unreasonable and therefore, amounts to a nuisance.
1- Location
2-Duration
3- Motive and Malice of the D
4- Sensitivity of the D
- Side rule- Interference with recreational activities (Hunter vs Canary Wharf)

Question 4

Private Nuisance factor 1

Answer 4

• Firstly, the location of the interference must be considered- (Leeman vs Montague)/(Hirose Electrical vs Peak Ingredients)
• The question to ask here is “Has the character of the neighborhood changed?”
• Apply to the scenario , considering what type of area the interference is in (Industrial, residential, a mix)
• Side rule- Damage to Land- If the nuisance causes physical damage to the C’s land, then the issue of location is irrelevant (St Helens Smelting vs Tipping)

Question 5

Private nuisance factor 2

Answer 5

• Secondly, the more long lasting the interference, the more likely to be a nuisance (Cunard vs Antifyre). Private nuisances are interferences for a substantial amount of time.
• Side rule- time of day- even if the interference was short in duration, it could still be unreasonable due to the time of day (De Keyser’s royal hotel)
• Side rule 2- Damage to land- and interference which is short in duration may still be W nuisance if it causes damage to the land (Crown river cruises vs Kimbolton fireworks)

Question 6

Private nuisance factor 3

Answer 6

-Thirdly, if the activity of the defendant is motivated by malice, it is likely to be unreasonable (Christie v Davey)

Question 7

Private Nuisance Factor 4

Answer 7

-sensitivity of the D= If the claimant is abnormally sensitive or their use of land is particularly sensitive, the defendant will not be liable unless the activity would amount to a nuisance to a reasonable person using the land in a normal manner (Robinson vs Kilvert)

Question 8

Private Nuisance stage 2 side rule

Answer 8

• If there is interference with the defendants recreational activities, it will usually be considered as unreasonable, and therefore not a nuisance (Hunter vs Canary Wharf)

Question 9

Defences for nuisance

Answer 9

• Statutory authority- Where an act of parliament gives permission for the nuisance (Allen vs Gulf Oil)
• Planning permission- in (Gillingham council vs Medway)- planning permission could mean that the character of the neighborhood has changed and therefore the interference is now reasonable.
• Prescription- if the claimant tolerates the nuisance for a substantial amount of time (20 years) before making a complaint.
  Vole it-non-fit-injuria - This is where the C consents to the nuisance
• Contributory negligence- Reduces compensation due to their own responsibility for the damage.
• Moving to the nuisance= If the D is only suffering because they moved closer to the problem, this is not a nuisance (Miller vs Jackson)

Question 10

Remedies for nuisance

Answer 10

• Compensatory damages- may be awarded where the damage is quantifiable
• Injunction= Stops the D from doing something:
  -(Miller vs Jackson)- Courts can refuse if not in the public interest, and award damages instead
  -(Kennaway vs Thompson)- Can be tailored to meet the exacts circumstances of the case.
  -Abatement- where the C is allowed to take reasonable steps to lessen the nuisance themselves- E.G- chopping down branches of a tree (Lemmon vs Webb)