nuisance Flashcards

(24 cards)

1
Q

what case sets out def of nuisance.

A

fearn and others v board of trustees for the tate gallery 2023.

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

what case sets out good neighbourlieness

A

south london borough council v Tanner 2001

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

what case sets out the give take live and let live principle

A

Banford v turley

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

cases for property damage.

A

music causing cracks- molone v leskey 1907

roots- davey v harror corporation

heat- robinson v kilvert

flood- sledleigh-denfield v callghan

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

cases for personal enjoyment.

A

nosie- sturges v bridgeman

smoke dust- shelfer v city of london electric lighting

smells- st helens smelting co v tipping

visual intrustion- Fearn

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

causes for buisness commerical enjoyment.

A

inteferance with buisness- hollywood silver fox farm v Emmett

electromagnetic infeferance with buisness equiptment- network rail co v morris

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

cases for who can and who cannot bring a claim.

A

can- hunter v Canary Wharf - legal interest, exclussive posession

cant- licensees malone v leskey 1907
occupation as a home- hunter v canary wharf

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

what rights are not protected cases

A

right to a view- bland v mosley

personal injury- hunter v canary wharf.

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

liability- guests cases

A

attorney general v stone.

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

liability trespassers.

A

page motors ltd v epson ewell borough council.

continuing nuisnace for themselves- sledleigh denfield v callaghan.

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

liability creator of the nuisance

A

dont have to have interest in land where nuisance came from- thomas v national union of mine workers south wales

not responsible for continuing nuisance if no remedy- cambridge water co v eastern counties leather ltd.

no longer in posession or occupation- hall v beckenham corporation 1947.

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

liability independant contractors.

A

generally not liable - various claimants v barclays bank plc

reasonable to foresee a nuisance- manania v national provincial bank.

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

liability act of nature.

A

may be liable if continue the nuisance oldman v halgrove.

dont take reasonable steps- hallbeck hotel v scarborough bc

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

case vicariously liable

A

various claimants v morrisons plc 2020

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

cases is lands use reasonable

A

fearn- art gallery see into peoples houses.

stables on residential street- flemming v he slop

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

locality cases-

A

steges v bridgeman belgravia square v bermonsdey

def locality- murdock v glacier metal co ltd

15
Q

liability landlord.

A

generally not responaible- hussain v lancaster cc

can be- Lawrence v fen tigers

16
Q

extent case

A

andrea v selfridges and co ltd.

17
Q

frequancy

A

calvert v gardiner

18
Q

intensity

A

calvert v gardiner

19
Q

timing

A

state of offiars - british antones v hunt ltd

1 off incidents- scm ltd v whittall and sons ltd

timing eg nighttime- de keyser royal hotel v spicer bros limited

20
Q

sensitivity.

A

robinson v kilvert - buisness

personal gaunt v finney

mkcinnon principle

21
Q

malice

A

hollywood silver fox farm v emmett

chasey v davey

22
Q

public benefit

A

adams v uswell- fish and chip shop public benefit.

may be relevant to remedy miller v Jackson ( cricket balls)