Tort - Nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher Flashcards
Public Nuisance
- Unreasonable interference with recognised public rights
- Can arise from a single act - no need to be continuous - but does need to be unreasonable
- So widespread in its range or indiscriminate in its effect it wouldn’t be reasonable for one person to take action
- Only public body can bring action unless special damage can be shown
- Can include damage to property and personal injury
- Attorney General can bring an action on behalf of the class of people affected
Civil action for public nuisance
Individual can only bring action if they have suffered special damage over and above the public at large, e.g:
- Damage to property
- Personal injury
- Loss of profits
Private nuisance
Unlawful interference with person’s use or enjoyment of land, e.g.
- Encroachment on land
- Physical damage to property
- Interference with comfort or convenience
Must be continuing and there must be damage - can include intangible damage but not personal injury
Claimant: owner/occupier with recognised legal interest in land
Defendants: creator of the nuisance, occupier of land from which nuisance arise, occupier’s landlord (in limited situations)
Unlawful interference
Substantial and unreasonable; unreasonable according to how people can be expected to live together in society
Differs to trespass to land because there is no requirement for it to be substantial and unreasonable
Courts will consider a number of factors
Locality
If residential the claimant will be expected to tolerate a lesser interference
Duration
At what time is the interference occurring and for how long
Abnormal sensitivity
E.g. extreme sensitivity to smells
May make it more difficult for claimant to bring action
Court will judge D’s activity based on whether it would be objectionable to a reasonable person in the community
Malice
Ordinary activity might be considered unreasonable if done for the purpose of upsetting a neighbour
Foreseeability of damage
If damage is too remote the defendant may not be liable for the damage
Remedy for private nuisance
Injunction - discretionary remedy
Private nuisance defences
- Prescription; prescriptive right to carry on an activity that constitutes a private nuisance (must have been continuously carried on for at least 20 years)
- Statutory authority; express or implied
Non-defences:
- Planning permission
- Coming to a nuisance (i.e. if someone purchases land next to an already existing nuisance, not a defence to say that the nuisance was already in existance before claimant came to it)
Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
Imposes strict liability - no need to show fault on the part of the defendant
No need to be continuing
Arises where there is an escape of a dangerous thing from the defendant’s land in the course of a non-natural use of the land
Three components:
- Brought or collected something on their land likely to cause harm if it escapes
- Engaged in a non-natural use of the land
- Thing on land does escape and causes harm
Personal injury not recoverable
Rylands v Fletcher
Constructed reservoir on their land. Below land was mine workings - D’s contractors failed to shut off mine shaft and reservoir burst and water flooded mine belonging to claimant. Defendant did not known of existence of mine workings until afterwards.
Defendant held to be liable for claimant’s lost - HoL imposed requirement for use of land to be non-natural
Thing likely to cause harm
Doesn’t have to be inherently dangerous - only dangerous if it escapes
Non-natural use of the land
Equated with extraordinary or abnormal use
Courts will take into account the degree of risk
E.g. Rylands and Fletcher - building a reservoir in an area known for mine workings was considered to be a non-natural use
