Nuisance: Intro

PQ structure for nuisance (no evaluation in this topic): 1. Discuss who C and D are. State the interference. 2. Is Prima Facie? Mention any reasonableness factors even tho they aren't relevant, Defences, remedies, conclusion. 3. Not prima facie: discuss reasonableness factors, defences and remedies, conclusion.

What is private nuisance and in what case was this defined?

Fearne v Tate Gallery: defined nuisance as a use of land which wrongfully interferes with the ordinary use and enjoyment of the land.

Private nuisance is when only individuals or small groups are affected

What is the difference between indirect and direct nuisance?

Direct = encroaches on the claimants land, such as roots.

Indirect = anything that has a substantial interference with the enjoyment of the land, such as a smell or smoke (Halsey v Esso)

What can there be no claim for under private nuisance?

Personal Injury (Malone v Laskey)

Who is the claimant?

Someone who has an interest in the land and have been affected by the interference.

A member of he owners family cannot claim if they don’t have an interest. However, the owner can claim on their behalf. (Hunter v Canary Wharf)

Who is the defendant?

The person causing or allowing the nuisance. D can also be liable for the actions of a trespasser or a previous owner (Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan)

Leakey v National Trust: National Trust did not remove mound which later caused damage to a cottage. National Trust were liable as they allowed the nuisance.

What must the courts consider for nuisance?

Whether it is reasonable for the C to have suffered the interference.

Hunter v Canary Wharf - Held that interference was not unreasonable.

Fearn v Tate Gallery - held that being looked upon was a nuisance.

Past nuisance case for being overlooked

Fearne v Tate Gallery: held on appeal that it was a nuisance

Past nuisance case for smells

Adams v Ursell: Fish and chip shop. C tried to claim public benefit which failed so they were liable.

Past nuisance case for loss of TV signal

Hunter v Canary Wharf: Held that interference was not unreasonable. CLAIM FAILED.

Past nuisance case for noise/heat/vibrations

Halsey v Esso Petroleum: held sound and gas were nuisances

Past nuisance case for lowering the ‘tone’ of residential areas

Laws v Florinplace: D opened sex shop in residential area. Held it was a nuisance

Past nuisance case for natural ‘accidents’

Leakey v National Trust: held it is a nuisance

Past nuisance case for cricket balls

Miller v Jackson: Held it was a nuisance

Past nuisance case for cliff subsidence

Holbeck Hall Hotel v Scarborough: Held it was a nuisance

Past nuisance case for noisy neighbours

Coventry v Lawrence: Can be a nuisance, but in this case it was not as it was a part of the character of the area.

Past nuisance case for blocked pipes

Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan: Held it was a nuisance

Past nuisance case for industrial vibrations

Sturges v Bridgman: Held it was a nuisance as they didn’t have prescription

Past nuisance case for loud noises such as gunshots

Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett: D was liable for nuisance

Past nuisance case for hot air rising

Kilvert: Held the D was not liable for nuisance due to the sensitivity of the paper

Past nuisance case for fire

Spicer v Smee: held it was a nuisance.