Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Law- > Private Nuisance (P2) > Flashcards

Private Nuisance (P2) Flashcards

1
Q

What is private nuisance?

A

-An unlawful interference for a substantial length of time

-Interferes with a person’s right to use or ‘enjoy’ their land

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

What must C show in Priv Nuisance?

A

1) They have a right to bring action and that the person they are suing is capable of being a D

2) There was interference in the form of either physical damage or ‘loss of amenity’

3) Interference is ‘sufficiently serious’ in all circumstance to be unlawful

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

What are the parties involved in private nuisance?

A

1) Claimant- person who has a legal interest in the land, owner/tenant

2) Defendant- creator of the nuisance (incudes landlord of a tenant if they authorise the activities)

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

What happens in (Hunter v Canary Wharf (1997)?

A

690 claims, inc children, relationships, spouses of the tenant or owner of property made against the Canary Wharf Ltd. C’s claimed the canary wharf tower interfered with TV reception

Unsuccessful

C’s who are members of a household but dont have an interest in the property cannot be claimed

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

Why were C’s unsuccessful in (Hunter v Canary Wharf(1997) ?

A

As Claimants who are members of a household but don’t have an interest in the property cannot be claimed

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

What happened in (Tetley v Chitty (1986) ?

A

-Council allowed a go kart club to use land for a track. Nearby residents brought an action in nuisance

Council were liable

A person who owns the land and gives permission for the activity that is a nuisance will be liable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What do we learn in (Tetley v Chitty) (1986)?

A

A person who owns the land and gives permission for the activity that is a nuisance will be liable

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

What happened in (Cocking & Another v Eacott & Another) (2016)

A

D owned a property, allowed daughter to live in rent free. C sued D for nuisance created by the excessive barking of her daughter’s dog

D Liable

Whoever is in control of the premises can be sued for nuisance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What do we learn from (Cocking & Another v Eacott & Another (2016) ?

A

Whoever is in control of the premises can be sued for nuisance

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

What are the two types of interference?

A

-Physical damage

-Loss of amenity (enjoyment of land)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is included in Physical damage?

A

-Plants, crops, damage to goods stored on the land

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is meant by Loss of Amenity (enjoyment of land)?

A

Where there is no physical damage, but C’s right to enjoy land is restricted such as being unable to sleep due to excessive noise!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What will courts consider when deciding if a interference is ‘unlawful’ ?

A

1) Locality
2) Duration
3) Degree Of Interference
4) Sensitivity
5) Reasons for D’s interference
6) Motive Behind The Activity

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

What do we view when looking at LOCALITY?

A

Where did the nuisance take place. Less nuisance expected in ‘quiet residential’ areas in comparison to industrial areas

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What do we view when looking at DURATION?

A

How long was the interference going on for? What time?

The more persistent a nuisance, the more likely the courts are going to deem it an unlawful one

Single events can be deemed a nuisance if they cause ‘serious’ interreference with C’s land (Crown River Cruises v kimbolton Fireworks (1996)

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

What do we view when looking at DEGREE OF INTERFERENCE?

A

-How bad was the interference to C’s land

-Low level interference is not going to be sufficient where C suffers loss of amenity

-Where physical damage is concerned, only small interferences can be unlawful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What do we view when looking at SENSITIVITY?

A

Was C using the land for sensitive purpose? was interference RF?

C can only claim if ‘ordinary use’ of land affected

C’s claim wont succeed if interference is one of sensitive nature

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What do we view when looking at REASONS FOR D’S INTERFERENCE?

A

Did D have a good reason for their activities was there a social benefit?

Where D has a good justification for activity/ social benefit courts may not issue an injunction as a remedy, award compensation

19
Q

What do we view when looking at MOTIVE BEHIND THE ACTIVITY?

A

Was D deliberately trying to harm C with activity if so the unreasonable behaviour is likely to be considered as a nuisance

20
Q

What happened in (St Helens Smelting v Tipping (1865)?

A

C owned a manor house with 1300 acres of land, situated a short distance from D’s copper smelting business. C brought a nuisance to D as of damage caused by his business to crops, trees and foliage. D argued use of property was reasonable given locality and his factory was there before C bought property

D liable of Priv Nuisance

Where there is physical damage to property, the locality principle has nor relevance. It is no defence that the claimant came to the nuisance

21
Q

What do we learn in (St Helens Smelting v Tipping (1865)?

A

Where there is physical damage to property, the locality principle has nor relevance. It is no defence that the claimant came to the nuisance

22
Q

What happened in Crown River Cruises v Kimbolton Fireworks (1996)?

A

D conducted a firework display. Some burning debris from display landed on a barge and caught fire

D liable

Even a single event can amount to unlawful interference if its severe enough

23
Q

What does (Crown River Cruises v Kimbolton Fireworks(1996) tell us?

A

Even a single event can amount to unlawful interference if its severe enough

24
Q

What do we learn in (Murdoch v Glacier Metal(1998)?

A

A low level noise preventing sleep will not constitute an actionable nuisance when considering the area(a busy bypass) where no one else had complained of the noise

25
What happened in (Bridlington Relay v Yorkshire Electricity)(1965)?
Electrical interference with TV signals by the activities of D electricity board Such interference did not constitute as legal nuisance Interference with a purely recreational facility, as opposed to interference with the health or physical comfort or well being of the plaintiffs
26
What happened in (McKinnon v Walker)(1951)?
D manufactured steel+iron products, 600 feet from C's property. C had a commercial florists as part of this grew orchids that are known for particular sensitivity. C brought action in relation to noxious fumes and smuts which had deposited over his shrubs,trees,hedges and flowers causing them to die D's act constituted an unlawful nuisance More resilient plants would have been affected by the same interference
27
Why was D liable of priv nuisance in (McKinnon v Walker)(1951)?
As more resilient plants would have been affected by the same interference
28
What happened in (Network Rail v Morris) (2004)?
C ran a recording studio near main London to Brighton rail line. D installed new track circuits which interfered with the amplification of electric guitars, causing C to lose business D not liable The use of amplified electric guitars was abnormally sensitive equipment, the interference was not foreseeable. Test for sensitivity is moving away from 'extra sensitive use' towards a test of reasonable foresight'
29
What happened in (Dennis v Ministry of Defence (2003)?
Aircraft noise from RAF base, ministry of Defence claimed that it was in the public interest that Britain should train jet pilots and this cannot be achieved noiselessly Nuisance, but lawful, those affected were compensated If D's activity is useful to society, then its interference may be unlawful
30
What do we learn in (Dennis v ministry of Defence)(2003)?
If D's activity is useful to society, then its interference may be unlawful
31
What case demonstrates that if D's activity is useful to society, then its interference may be unlawful
(Dennis v Ministry of Defence) (2003)
32
What happened in (Christie v Davey) (1892)?
C gave private music lessons at her home and her family enjoyed playing. C lived in a semi detached house, D had complained off noise, he took to banging on walls and shouting D's actions were motivated by malice and therefore did constitute a nuisance. Injunction granted to restrain his actions
33
What happened in (Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett (1936)?
C bred silver foxes for fur. They are particularly timid and if disturbed when pregnant are prone to miscarry. D was C's neighbour and objected the farm. He fired gun on his land close to breeding pens intending to scare foxes and impede breeding D was liable despite the abnormal sensitivity of the foxes Because D was motivated by malice to do the interference, this made it unlawful
34
Why was D liable despite the abnormal sensitivity of the foxes in (Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett) (1936)?
Because D was motivated by malice to do the interference, this made it unlawful
35
What is the defence of Statutory Authority?
Its a defence If D can show that the nuisance is created by public body acting under a legislative duty of power As long as activity is carried out with reasonable regard to the interest of others, C cannot sue as Parliament has, in effect, authorised the nuisance
36
What happened in (Allen v Gulf Oil) (1981)?
C brought an action in nuisance for smell, noise+ vibration created by oil refinery constructed by D on their land. D constructed oil refinery with authorisation by an Act of Parliament No nuisance as they were acting with the permission of an Act of Parliament
37
Why was it deemed no nuisance in (Allen v Gulf oil)(1981)?
No nuisance as they were acting with the permission of an Act of Parliament
38
What case confirms that there isn't a nuisance if someone acts with permission of an Act of Parliament?
(Allen v Gulf oil)(1981)
39
What happened in (Marcic v Thames Water Utilities) (2004)?
C's house repeatedly flooded by sewage+water following a failure by D to carry out sewer repairs Was a nuisance, but C lost his claim The act required C to complain to the industry watchdog and used of methods of ADR detailed there. Where statue provides a means of resolving disputes, then that must be followed instead of bringing a claim for nusiance
40
What is the Defence of Prescription?
Means D's activities become lawful because he has been carrying them out for the last twenty years
41
What is the Defence of 'coming to the nuisance'?
Where a nuisance exists before C moves to the land Courts have repeatedly rejected this argument of any D who claims that 'they were there first'
42
What happened in (Fearn v Tate Modern Gallery)(2023)?
A block of flats was built next to the Tate Modern Gallery. Residents complained visitors accessing balcony of tate were causing a nuisance by looking into their homes D was creating a nuisance Despite being there longer, SC ruled in favour of the residents arguing that 'coming to the nuisance' is not an accepted defence
43
What are the remedies available in Priv Nuisance?
1) Injunctions 2) Damages 3) Abatement

Law- (16 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions