PRIVATE NUISANCE

Question 1

In what case did the courts decide that members in a household that did not have interest in the land cannot claim? (1)

Answer 1

hunter v canary wharf ltd

Question 2

what occurred in the case of Mckenna v British aluminium (2002)? 2)

Answer 2

over 30 claimants, including some children who had no interest in the land affected were able to claim in nuisance for noise and fumes that came from the defendants factory.

Question 3

what occurred in the case of Anthony v the coal authority (2005)? (2)

Answer 3

defendant took over responsibility for the land form a former colliery, land was later sold as common land, fire started through spontaneous combustion which lasted 3 years causing fumes and smoke interference. defendant was liable because it was aware of the problem.

Question 4

what cases support an owner being held liable for natural causes on their land? (1)

Answer 4

-leakey v national trust (1980)
-Anthony v national coal authority (2005)

Question 5

what occurred in the case of leakey v national trust (1980)? (2)

Answer 5

defendant owned land on which there was a large mound on a hillside, they were aware that at some point it would slip, it did and when it did it damaged the claimants cottage. Defendants were liable as they knew it was a possibility it could slip.

Question 6

what case shows than an occupier can be liable for natural causes on their land? (1)

Answer 6

leakey v national trust (1980)

Question 7

what occurred in the case of sedleigh Denfield v o’callaghan (1940? (2)

Answer 7

defendants were an order of monks who occupied land where there was a ditch, a local authority without the defendants knowledge fixed a pipe to lead water away from the ditch, the grate became blocked and the neighbouring land was flooded by this time the defendants knew of the pipe therefore they were liable for nuisance.

Question 8

what case shows that a person causing or allowing the nuisance can be sued? (1)

Answer 8

tetty v chitty (1986)

Question 9

what case shows than an owner can be liable for ‘adopting’ a nuisance? ((1)

Answer 9

sedleigh denfield v o’callaghan (1940)

Question 10

what occurrs where the owner is not responsible for the nuisance? (1)

Answer 10

he or she might still be liable as a result of ‘adopting’ the nuisance, failing to deal with the problem even if it was caused by a previous owner or a trespasser.

Question 11

what is a material damage nuisance? (1)

Answer 11

where a dangerous state of affairs on the defendants land causes significant physical damage to the claimants land

Question 12

what occurred in the case of Tetley v Chitty (1986)? (2)

Answer 12

a local authority allowed allowed go-kart held liable for a nuisance.

Question 13

what are the types of private nuisance? (2)

Answer 13

-loss of amenity nuisance when caused by noise, smell or smoke
-material damage nuisance

Question 14

what cases support the factor of duration of the interference for reasonableness? (2)

Answer 14

-crown river cruises ltd v Kimbolton fireworks ltd (1996)
-De keysers royal hotel v spicer bros (1914)

Question 15

what cases support the factors of sensitivity of the claimants for reasonableness? (2)

Answer 15

-robinson v Kilvert (1889)
-network rail infrastructure v morris (2004)

Question 16

what cases support the factor of malice for reasonableness? (2)

Answer 16

Hollywood silver fox farm v Emmett (1936)
christie v Davey (1893)

Question 17

what cases show that the courts are prepared to protect feelings of motional distress? (2)

Answer 17

-Thompson-schwab v costaki (1956)
laws v flurinplacelta (1981)

Question 18

what is considered loss of amenity? (3)

Answer 18

fumes drifting over neighbouring land
-smell from farm animals
-noise

Question 19

what do the courts consider when debating how ‘unlawful’ is considered? (1)

Answer 19

courts will attempt to balance conflicting interests they will expect neighbours to experience a certain amount of ‘give and take’ and consider whether it is reasonable for the claimant to have to suffer the particular interference and whether the interference is excessive.

Question 20

what case supports the release of restriction from house members? (1)

Answer 20

Mckenna v British aluminium (2002)

Question 21

what is meant by unlawful? (1)

Answer 21

the claimant must move that the defendants activity amounts to an unlawful use of land, ‘unlawful’ here does not mean illegal, but rather means that courts accept that the defendants use of land is unreasonable in a way that it affects the claimants

Question 22

how can the restriction put on house members be overcome? (1)

Answer 22

this restriction may be overtaken by establishing a rish

Question 23

what factors decide whether the use of land by the defendant is unreasonable? (5)

Answer 23

-locality
-the duration of the interference
-sensitivity of the claimant
-malice
-social benefit

Question 24

what cases support the factor considering reasonableness in terms of locality? (1)

Answer 24

sturges v Bridgman (1879)

Question 25

what is the basic rule of private nuisance? (1)

Answer 25

anyone who uses or enjoys land and is affected by an interference may claim. this will include being an owner of a teneant but not a member of the owners family

Question 26

what is considered material damage? (5)

Answer 26

-Vibrations from industrial machinery -hot air rising into other premises

Question 27

what are the elements of private nuisance? (2)

Answer 27

-'unlawful' -'indirect interference'