Nuisance Flashcards Preview

Tort > Nuisance > Flashcards

Flashcards in Nuisance Deck (61)
Loading flashcards...
1

Definition of private nuisance

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

2

Claimant must have a legal interest in land

Malone v Laskey, confirmed in Hunter v Canary Wharf

3

Creator of nuisance can be sued

Thomas v NUM

4

Occupier of land can be sued

Leakey v National Trust

5

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

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)

6

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

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

7

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

Goldman v Hargrave

8

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

Holbeck Hall v Scarborough

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

Tetley v Chitty

10

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

Lippiatt v South Gloucestershire Council; Page Motors v Epsom

11

Water may be indirect interference

Sedleigh-Denfield

12

Recovery can only be made for damage that is foreseeable

Cambridge Water Company v Eastern Counties Leather

13

SPD and physical damage to property are recoverable in private nuisance

St Helen's Smelting.
Lemmon v Webb for physical damage to property

14

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

Hunter v Canary Wharf

15

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

Cambridge Water Company v Easter Counties Leather

16

Bamford v Turnley

rule of give and take, live and let live.

17

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

Sedleigh-Denfield

18

Time and Duration of nuisance

Kennaway v Thompson

19

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

Spicer v Smee

20

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

St Helen's Smelting

21

Sturges v Bridgman

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

22

Fumes from fish and chip shop nuisance in residential area

Adams v Ursell

23

Sex shop in residential area was nuisance

Laws v Florinplace

24

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

Wheeler v JJ Saunders

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)

Robinson v Kilvert

26

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

McKinnon Industries v Walker (orchids)

27

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

Network Rail v CJ Morris

28

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

Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett

29

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

Andrae v Selfridge

30

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

Farrer v Nelson