Nuisance (Private)

Question 1

N - Who can sue in nuisance?

Answer 1

The claimant must have a proprietary interest, so could be the owner or the tenant.

Question 2

Who can be sued for nuisance?

Answer 2

The creator of the nuisance, the landlord that knew about the nuisance but did nothing to stop it - therefore authorising the nuisance, or occupiers liable if they fail to deal with trespassers.

Question 3

In Nuisance what is there no protection for? What are the respective cases which show this?

Answer 3

• A right to a view, (Bland) and (Hunter)
• The right to light
• The right to not be overlooked (Tate Gallery)

Question 4

What are the 3 types of nuisance?

Answer 4

Encroachment on land, direct physical damage to land or interference with quiet enjoyment of the land

Question 5

What needs to happen to use the direct physical damage to land, for nuisance?

Answer 5

The claiment must show the damage.

Question 6

How are the 3 types of nusiance assessed?

Answer 6

They are assessed subjectively on a case-by-case basis.

Question 7

What must the damage be?

Answer 7

it must be material and substantial (subjective rule)

Question 8

What does Cambridge water rule?

Answer 8

That the harm of being a nuisance must be reasonably foreseeable. (Key rule)

Question 9

What did Spicer rule?

Answer 9

That it wasn’t about time but continuous conditions of the nuisance.

Question 10

What does the defendant need to be to get sued?

Answer 10

He needs to be unreasonable.

Question 11

What does it mean to be unreasonable?

Answer 11

Does the defendants use of their land cause a nuisance?

Question 12

What does Bamford rule?

Answer 12

That there is a rule of give and take

Question 13

What does it mean by the rule of give and take?

Answer 13

That we must people live and let live, we can encroach on their peace if they are allowed to encroach on our peace. on the off-chance of any nuisance.

Question 14

What must the claiment show?

Answer 14

That the defendant acted unreasonably

Question 15

What will the courts consider when deciding if the defendant was unreasonable?

Answer 15

If a normal person would find D’s actions unreasonable.

Question 16

What are the factors considered by the court when deciding how serious the nuisance is?

Answer 16

• If the nuisance was a one-off or continuous activity
• The intensity of the activity
• The locality of it
• An oversensitive claiment
  -The malice of D

Question 17

What is locality?

Answer 17

The nuisance will have a different impact on the claiment depending on where the nuisance takes place. I.E in a rural or industrial area

Question 18

What did Halsey rule?

Answer 18

That location of a nuisance is relevant when considering noise or smell.

Question 19

What did Sturges v Bridgman rule?

Answer 19

That noisy behaviour was quickly seen as a nuisance in rural areas than in industrial

Question 20

What did Gillingham BC v Medway Dock rule?

Answer 20

That planning permission may impact nature of locality.

Question 21

What does the ruling of Medway Dock mean?

Answer 21

That statutory authority could allow for a nuisance if it cannot be avoided, I.E like getting planning permission and building something.

Question 22

What does Coventry v Lawernce rule?

Answer 22

Planning permission does not guarantee the right to cause a nuisance

Question 23

What are the details of Coventry v Lawerence

Answer 23

There was a racing track for over 20 years, but homes started to be built closer. Eventually somebody sued but the courts ruled:
- The racing circuit had become part of the nature of the locality
- And as the continuation of activities for over 20 years without complaints leads to being granted a right to be there (prescription)

Question 24

When is the claiment called an oversensitive claiment?

Answer 24

When they are not a tolerable neighbour

Question 25

What case is the standard of a tolerable neighbour created?

Answer 25

Robinson

Question 26

What are the details of robinson?

Answer 26

The claimant used particulary sensitive paper, told they were not a tolerable neighbour as they had too high an expectation for their neighbours.

Question 27

What did Hunter v Canary Wharf rule?

Answer 27

That interference with a TV reception is not a nuisance

Question 28

What did Christie rule?

Answer 28

That malice of the defendant can make what might be considered reasonable be reassessed as unreasonable/a nuisance due to their intention.

Question 29

What happens if a building/ site has been there for over 20 years?

Answer 29

That it has a prescription to be there, as they have run the operations without any complaints so far. It becomes part of the local area after being there so long, so it no longer is considered a nuisance.

Question 30

What are the potential remedies for a nuisance?

Answer 30

• Damages (compensation)
• Injunction to prevent activity
• The activity could be restricted rather than prevented.
• Claimant can use self-abatement
• Court balance the cost of D having to stop or modify the action.

Question 31

What ruling might be overturned if the same case where to come up today?

Answer 31

The right to TV reception was denied in Hunter, this was decades ago and in modern society it is entirely possible this may be considered differently.