Structure of Nuisance exam structure
Intro:
Definition - Nuisance is the unlawful interference with a persons use or enjoyment of land coming from neighbouring land.
Who can sue - Anyone with proprietary interest in the land as established in Hunter V Canary Wharf
Who can be sued - The creator of the nuisance, the occupier of the land if they knew of the nuisance (as established in sedleigh denfield) or the owner of the land.
Apply this to the case and say if they can sue and what the nuisance is in the case
Main body:
1) Was there a natural cause, if they knew about the natural cause and didn’t do precautions, they are liable (Leakey)
2) Sufficient damage has been done: This can be physical damage or a hindrance of enjoyment which, as established in St Helens Smelting Co, must affect the everyday use and enjoyment of your land.
3) Must be an indirect interference - Through a medium like smell or noise rather than D doing something like putting rubbish onto the claimants land. (Indirect interference can be seen in Laws V Florinplace)
4) Ds conduct must be unreasonable according to 5 things:
a) Locality - Depending on where the nuisance is being made depends on whether they would find someone liable for example Sturges V Bridgman
b) Duration and frequency - If it takes place often or for a long period of time they are more likely find a nuisance but if it is brief and rare then it is unlikely to find a nuisance for example Bolton V Stone
c) Sensitivity of claimant - If the claimant is unusually sensitive to the nuisance, it won’t make it anymore likely to find liability for example Robinson v Kilvert
d) Malice - If the defendant does the nuisance out of malice, it is more likely to find them liable of nuisance, for example Hollywood silver fox farm.
e) Social benefit - If there is a social benefit, less likely to find a nuisance, for example Miller v Jackson
Defences:
Volenti
Contributory Negligence
Remedies:
Damages (only when physical damage is involved)
Injunction
Abatement