Nuisance A01 Flashcards

1
Q

Nuisance

A

civil dispute between individuals (commonly between neighbours)

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

Define Nuisance

A

unreasonable interference with others use or enjoyment of land

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

What is the 3 part test

A

1) indirect interference of land
2) damage
3) interference is unreasonable

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

Who can claim (case)

A

Owner or occupier - Hunter v Canary Wharf

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

Who can be sued (case)

A

Creator of the nuisance
Occupier of the property
Owner (e.g: local council in Tetley v Chitty)

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

Interference must be

A

indirect (has to be on defendants land)
+
affect others use or enjoyment of their land

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

Interference could be

A

-smells
-smoke
-vibrations
-tree roots

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

Interference cannot be a one off… (case)

A

Must be continuous/ongoing - Leakey v National Trust

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

Hunter v Canary Wharf

A

no right to a view or tv reception

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

Damage

A

No requirement for physical damage

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

Damage can be…

A

Intangible - discomfort and inconvenience will be sufficient

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

Claim involving physical damage more likely to succeed (case)

A

Helens v Tipping
damage to plants by smoke - would have failed if it were not for the physical damage

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

Causation (case)

A

The normal rules of causation apply when proving damage as confirmed in Wagon Mound the damage cannot be too remote.

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

Unreasonable

A

Behaviour that goes beyond the normal bounds of reasonable behaviour

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

Southwark BLC v Mills

A

everyday noises are not unreasonable, e.g: noises in a flat

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the 4 factors affecting unreasonableness

A

Abnormal sensitivity
Locality
Duration
Malice

17
Q

Abnormal Sensitivity (case)

A

Will not be found liable if damage is due to AS

However, if there is general damage AS WELL it may succeed - Mckinnon v Walker (abnormally sensitive orchids)

18
Q

Locality (case)

A

Won’t be liable if nuisance is due to local area e.g: urban/rural noises and smells - Sturges v Brigman

19
Q

Duration

A

More likely to succeed if it
-lasts a long time
-occurs during reasonable hours

20
Q

Duration - Crown River Cruises v Kimbolton

A

one off firework displays would not usually be unreasonable, but the damage in this case was

21
Q

Duration - Andrea v Selfridge

A

Temporary building work isn’t unreasonable

22
Q

Malice (case)

A

If the nuisance was done maliciously it is more likely to be unreasonable - Christie v Davey