Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law -Tort > Private Nuisance (and the rule in Ryland v Fletcher) > Flashcards

Private Nuisance (and the rule in Ryland v Fletcher) Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

Define private nuisance

A
  • unlawful conduct that materially affects the comfort and convenience of a class of her majesty’s subjects
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what actions can encompass a private nuisance and what cases

A
  • Primarily a crime of great breadth (swimming without clothes) - R v Crunden
  • Physical damage to C’s land - Wringe v Cohen
  • Interference with Comfort and Convenience (Amenity) such as Intangible damage (noise, smells, dust) - Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

why does harassment not count for PN?

A
  • Khorasandjian - C lacked a proprietary interest

- Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what are the 2 requirement for PN in St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping: per Lord Westbury and what does it say about remedies

A
  • material damage
  • interference with comfort and convenience (or amenity).
  • Where damage is material/physical, courts are likely to grant C a remedy.
  • Where C’s claim concerns comfort and convenience, courts engage in a balancing exercise
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is Lord Westbury’s Distinction with Reasonableness for PN?

A
  • ‘Reasonableness’ refers to the outcome of D’s conduct.

- Has C suffered harm (interference)?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what does Exceeding reasonable limits mean with PN?

A
  • most of the activities that discomfort or inconvenience an occupier are, in themselves, perfectly lawful and only become unlawful if they are carried on in such a way as to exceed reasonable limits
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

how are interferences meant to be assessed + case?

A
  • objectively

- Walter v Selfe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what factors should be considered for Locality for PN?

A
  • The nature of the locality may change: Medway (Chatham) Dock Ltd
  • Planning and Regulatory Approval (Barr v Biffa Waste Management Services)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what is the test in Barr v Biffa Waste Management Services

A

would a normal person have found it reasonable to put up with the effects of D’s activities?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what factors should be considered for Interference with Comfort and Convenience and Balancing for PN? (5)

A
  • Abnormal sensitivity
  • Level of interference (The duration and intensity)
  • Public benefit (associated with D’s activity).
  • Malice
  • Multifactorial balancing exercise → strong judicial discretion → fact-sensitive responses to claims.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what is the case for abnormal sensitivity?

A
  • Robinson v Kilvert
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what are consideration for Abnormal Sensitivity and Television and cases?

A
  • Nor-Video Services: watching television is a form of ordinary enjoyment.
  • Hunter: interference with television reception caused by tall building was not identified as actionable nuisance.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what case concerns the intensity of the nuisance and what did they say?

A
  • Matania v National Provincial Bank Ltd.

- a temporary interference may, if substantial, constitute an actionable nuisance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

can an isolated occurrence give rise to an actionable private nuisance + case?

A
  • yes
  • SCM v W.J Whittall : the nuisance must arise from the condition of D’s land or from activities carried out on the land.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what does Miller v Jackson concern for PN?

A
  • public benefit
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what case concerns malice for public nuisance?

A
  • Christie v Davey
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

can their be a duty of care for PN? why? and case?

A
  • yes
  • D took inadequate steps to alleviate the risk.
  • Goldman v Hargrave
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what are the control requirements in Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire?

A
  • D need not have a proprietary interest in the land from which the escape (of something dangerous) occurs
  • But D must have control of the source of danger
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

what is the remoteness test in Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather plc

A

‘foreseeability of damage of the relevant type should be regarded as a prerequisite of liability … under the rule’.

20
Q

what is Blackburn J’s Judgment in Rylands v Fletcher?

A
  • ‘[T]he true rule of law is, that the person who for his own purposes brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and, if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural and probable consequence of its escape’.
21
Q

what is the decision procedure for ryland v fletcher?

A
  1. Accumulation
  2. non-natural use. (An interpretative battleground.)
  3. Escape
  4. Damage
  5. Remoteness
  6. Defences
22
Q

what is needed for accumulation

A
  • The thing that (later) escapes must be brought onto D’s land.
  • accumulation must be voluntary.
  • Where D is instrumental in causing things naturally on the land to escape
23
Q

what’s is non natural use + case

A
  • Rickards v Lothian (Privy Council)

- ‘It must be some special use bringing with it increased danger to others’.

24
Q

what should Non-natural uses must be distinguished from

A

(a) ‘ordinary use of the land or
(b) such use as is proper for the general benefit of the community’. if the risk serves the general benefit of the community, that could be ok – utilitarian view

25
Q

what does Lord Moulton’s claim about ‘general benefit’?

A

Lord Moulton’s claims concerning ‘general benefit’ to the community have been rejected.

26
Q

what is the question for non natural use?

A
  • whether the particular object can be dangerous’.
27
Q

who decides whether a use is natural or non natural?

A
  • whether a use is ‘natural’ or ‘non-natural’ is ‘a question of fact subject to a ruling of the judge’
28
Q

what are three considerations for non natural uses and cases?

A
  • increase danger to others (Rickards v Lothian)
  • danger (Read v Lyons)
  • extraordinary and unusual (Transco v Stockport MBC)
29
Q

what are some examples of non natural uses? (5)

A
  • Domestic water supplies
  • Household fires
  • Electric wiring in houses and shops
  • The ordinary working of mines
  • Keeping trees and shrubs – unless, perhaps, poisonous (Crowhurst)
30
Q

what are 3 relevant considerations when determining there is an abnormal risk of the non natural use in Mason v Levy Auto Parts

A
  • quantity of material
  • the way it was stored
  • the character of the neighbourhood.
31
Q

what are 6 scenarios where R+F could apply + cases?

A
  1. Jones v Festiniog Railway Co, per Blackburn J: fire. Sparks from a train set fire to a haystack.
  2. Batchellor v Tunbridge Wells Gas Co : gas likely to pollute water supplies.
  3. Miles v Forest Rock Granite: explosions (rocks blasted in quarrying operations).
  4. National Telephone Co v Baker: electricity.
  5. Smith v Great Western Railway: oil.
  6. West v Bristol Tramways: noxious fumes.
32
Q

what are the 6 defences for R+F and what are the cases

A
  • Act of God: Nichols v Marsland
  • Unforeseeable act of third party: Rickards v Lothian.
  • Consent (volenti non fit injuria): Attorney- General v Cory Brothers.
  • necessity (Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire)
  • statutory authority
  • default of the claimant (Dunn)
33
Q

What is the rule about Rylands v Fletcher and fire?

A
  • The Court of Appeal’s approach in Stannard reduced to a ‘rule’: the fire must be brought onto D’s land and, later, escape.
34
Q

what is the defence of prescription and what case?

A
  • Where a private nuisance continues for 20 years, D may be entitled to claim a prescriptive right to engage in the relevant interference.
  • Sturges v Bridgman
35
Q

how can prescription fail as a defence

A
  • The nuisance began when C’s new building was erected.
36
Q

what is needed for the defence of prescription?

A
  • D must show that:
    (i) The interference amounted to a private nuisance throughout the twenty-year period; and –
    (ii) The interference must have been engaged in as of right: i.e., not secretly, forcibly, or without permission.
37
Q

what must D show for the Defence of Statutory Authority + case?

A
  • D must show that interference with C’s rights is permitted either by (a) express wording in the statute or by (b) necessary implication.
  • Metropolitan Asylum District Managers v Hill
38
Q

how does D give the defence of consent + case?

A
  • Consent may be pleaded as a defence to private nuisance claims.
  • Available where C, knowing of the danger to his or her property, has (by word or deed) shown willingness to accept the relevant risk(s).
  • Leakey v National Trust.
39
Q

what is the case the Partial Defence of Contributory Negligence

A
  • Trevett v Lee
40
Q

does and act of a trespasser does not yield a defence + case?

A
  • Act of a trespasser does not yield a defence where D knowingly or negligently continues the nuisance
  • Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan
41
Q

what is not a defence

A
  • coming to the nuisance (Miller v Jackson)
  • Public Benefit (Adams v Ursell)
  • ## More than one person contributes to the harm (Thorpe v Brumfitt)
42
Q

what does Gillingham BC v Medway (Chatham) Dock state about planning permission

A
  • A planning authority can, through its development plans and decisions, alter the character of a neighbourhood.
43
Q

what does Wheeler v Saunders state about planning permission?

A
  • Planning permission need not preclude the possibility of bringing a private nuisance claim where only the interests of C and D are involved.
  • Planning permission: grants of planning permission may preclude a claim where the public interest is being served.
44
Q

what are the 3 remedies

A
  • Injunction - stop any kind of threat now
  • Damages in lieu of an injunction - give the claimants compensatory sum and allow the interference to continue.
  • 1 & 2 may be coupled with damages for past harm
45
Q

what human rights article can be in conflict with PN

A

Article 8

46
Q

what did Coventry v Lawrence state about Remedies

A
  • Lords Neuberger and Carnwath agreed that planning permission can influence the remedy C is able to obtain and that the existence of a planning permission could justify the refusal of an injunction and the award of damages in lieu

Law -Tort (6 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions