Nuisance

Question 1

Definition of private nuisance

Answer 1

Bamford v Turnley: any continuous activity or state of affairs causing substantial and unreasonable interference with the plaintiff’s land or his use or enjoyment of that land

Question 2

Claimant must have a legal interest in land

Answer 2

Malone v Laskey, confirmed in Hunter v Canary Wharf

Question 3

Creator of nuisance can be sued

Answer 3

Thomas v NUM

Question 4

Occupier of land can be sued

Answer 4

Leakey v National Trust

Question 5

Occupier may be liable for contractors where the tasks he asks them to do cause a reasonably foreseeable and inevitable nuisance

Answer 5

Matania (though surprising that building work formed private nuisance - people expected to put up with a certain amount of give and take - Bamford v Turnley)

Question 6

Occupier only liable for nuisance created by a trespasser if he continued or adopted the nuisance

Answer 6

Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan ; Page Motors v Epsom

Question 7

Occupier liable for failing to take reasonable steps to abate the naturally occurring nuisance that was reasonable foreseeable

Answer 7

Goldman v Hargrave

Question 8

Occupier not expected to bankrupt himself in the process of averting a naturally occurring nuisance

Answer 8

Holbeck Hall v Scarborough

Question 9

Landlord not liable unless he created it, authorised it or knew/ought to have known of the nuisance at the time of letting the property

Answer 9

Tetley v Chitty

Question 10

Council liable for gypsies as they had allowed them to stay on land

Answer 10

Lippiatt v South Gloucestershire Council; Page Motors v Epsom

Question 11

Water may be indirect interference

Answer 11

Sedleigh-Denfield

Question 12

Recovery can only be made for damage that is foreseeable

Answer 12

Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather

Question 13

SPD and physical damage to property are recoverable in private nuisance

Answer 13

St Helen’s Smelting.

Lemmon v Webb for physical damage to property

Question 14

Not all interference with enjoyment can be claimed - loss of TV signal

Answer 14

Hunter v Canary Wharf

Question 15

If user is reasonable, defendant will not be liable. If user is unreasonable, D will be liable

Answer 15

Cambridge Water Company v Easter Counties Leather

Question 16

Bamford v Turnley

Answer 16

rule of give and take, live and let live.

Question 17

Balancing act between rights of occupier to do what he wants with land and rights of neighbour to have quiet enjoyment of land

Answer 17

Sedleigh-Denfield

Question 18

Time and Duration of nuisance

Answer 18

Kennaway v Thompson

Question 19

Single incident may be a nuisance if it illustrates an underlying state of affairs

Answer 19

Spicer v Smee

Question 20

Character of neighbourhoos is only relevant to SPD (NOT physicial damage)

Answer 20

St Helen’s Smelting

Question 21

Sturges v Bridgman

Answer 21

What would be a nuisance in Belgrave Square would not necessarily be so in Bermondsey

Question 22

Fumes from fish and chip shop nuisance in residential area

Answer 22

Adams v Ursell

Question 23

Sex shop in residential area was nuisance

Answer 23

Laws v Florinplace

Question 24

Planning permission will not authorise a nuisance, but it may alter the character of the area

Answer 24

Wheeler v JJ Saunders

Question 25

Claimant who is abnormally sensitive cannot claim the activities that would not affect the ordinary occupier are a nuisance to him alone (heat sensitive paper)

Answer 25

Robinson v Kilvert

Question 26

If reasonable occupier would be affected, claimant can clam for full extent of injuries, even though these are increased by his sensitivies

Answer 26

McKinnon Industries v Walker (orchids)

Question 27

Railway signalling interfered with electric guitars in recording studio - courts should not be too strict applying abnormal sensitivity

Answer 27

Network Rail v CJ Morris

Question 28

More likely to be a nuisance if no real justification for behaviour/just to annoy claimant

Answer 28

Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett

Question 29

Defendant's lack of care likely to count in claimant's favour

Answer 29

Andrae v Selfridge

Question 30

If defendant has behaved in excessive manner, this may indicate that he is being unreasonable

Answer 30

Farrer v Nelson

Question 31

Public utility does not justify commission of a nuisance

Answer 31

Adams v Ursell; Miller v Jackson; Dennis v MOD

Question 32

Claimant can still sue for a nuisance which was present when the claimant moved to the property

Answer 32

Miller v Jackson; Sturges v Bridgman

Question 33

Prescription counts from the time that a claimant could have complained, not the time the activity started

Answer 33

Sturges v Bridgman

Question 34

Statutory Authority may be a defence if he exercised due care

Answer 34

Allen v Gulf Oil

Question 35

Damages

Answer 35

Dennis v MOD

Question 36

Damages for personal injury not recoverable

Answer 36

Hunter; Transco

Question 37

Partial injunction

Answer 37

Kennaway v Thompson

Question 38

Abatement

Answer 38

Lemmon v Webb

Question 39

HRA

Answer 39

McKenna v British Aluminium; Dobson

Question 40

Public nuisance definition

Answer 40

"acts or omissions of the defendant that materially affects the comfort and convenience of life of a class of HM's subjects" Attorney General v PYA Quarries

Question 41

Effect of nuisance must be sufficiently widespread; exact number of people affected depends on facts of case

Answer 41

R v Rimmington; AG v Hastings Corporation

Question 42

Pop concert

Answer 42

AG of Ontario v Orange

Question 43

Blocking a canal

Answer 43

Rose v Miles

Question 44

Acid house party

Answer 44

R v Shorrock

Question 45

Individual claimant does not need interest in land

Answer 45

Tate and Lyle v GLC

Question 46

Pure economic loss can be recovered

Answer 46

Rose v Miles

Question 47

Rylands v Fletch

Answer 47

the person who for his own purpose brings on to his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes must keep it at his peril

Question 48

Thistles not brought onto land; no liability

Answer 48

Giles v Walker

Question 49

Acid

Answer 49

Rainham v Belvedere

Question 50

Explosives

Answer 50

Read v Lyons

Question 51

no element of escape

Answer 51

Read v Lyons

Question 52

Rickards v Lothian

Answer 52

Non-natural user = some special use bringin with it increased danger to others; not merely the ordinary use of the land or use as is proper for general benefit of community

Question 53

Chemicals are classic case of non-natural user

Answer 53

Cambridge Water Company v Easter Counties Leather

Question 54

Piping domestic water was not a non-natural user

Answer 54

Transco

Question 55

Damage must be foreseeable

Answer 55

Cambridge Water Co

Question 56

Claimant must have proprietary interest

Answer 56

suggested in Read v Lyons; in light of Cambridge Water Co it appears Rylands is a branch of private nuisance Following Hunter v Canary Wharf, proprietary interest is necessary

Question 57

Personal injury not recoverable in public nuisance

Answer 57

Transco; Hunter v Canary Wharf

Question 58

Defence of common benefit

Answer 58

Peters v Prince of Wales Theatre

Question 59

If escape wholly caused by claimant's actions, defendant will not be liable

Answer 59

Dunn v Birmingham Canal

Question 60

Defendant will escape liability if situation arose through the unforeseeable act of a stranger over whom he had no control. Only if defendant was not negligent

Answer 60

Perry v Kendrick's Transport

Question 61

Act of God defence restricted to exception situations

Answer 61

Nichols v Marsland