Private Nuisance - unlawful interference (Abnormal sensitivity)- FS Flashcards
(8 cards)
How does the court assess interference in private nuisance claims involving abnormally sensitive claimants?
The court assesses interference based on the effect it would have on a reasonable person, disregarding any abnormal or unusual sensitivity of the claimant when determining whether the defendant’s conduct was unreasonable.
Why would a claimant with unusually sensitive property or characteristics potentially fail in a private nuisance claim?
If the interference would not affect a reasonable person, the court will consider the defendant’s use of land as reasonable, and the claimant’s abnormal sensitivity will not make the conduct unreasonable or actionable.
What happens if a claimant proves that a reasonable person would have been affected by the interference, even though they themselves are abnormally sensitive?
If the interference would have affected a reasonable person, the claimant can recover for the full extent of their loss, even if that loss is exacerbated by their sensitivity, applying the eggshell skull rule.
What is the legal principle that allows an abnormally sensitive claimant to recover full damages if the nuisance would affect a reasonable person?
The eggshell skull rule — once liability is established, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the harm, even if the claimant suffered greater damage due to unusual sensitivity.
Why would a claim for damage to heat-sensitive paper fail if the interference wouldn’t affect ordinary goods?
Because the court considers what would happen to ordinary property, not abnormally delicate items. If ordinary items remain unaffected, the use of land is deemed reasonable, and no nuisance arises.
If no one else is affected by a distant source of noise but a claimant claims harm, how would the court likely rule?
The court would likely find that the claimant is abnormally sensitive, and if a reasonable person would not be affected, the interference is not a nuisance, so the claim will likely fail.
Can a claimant succeed in a private nuisance claim for damage to sensitive plants if ordinary plants would also have been harmed?
Yes. If the interference would have harmed normal, robust plants, the claimant can recover for all resulting damage, including harm to more delicate or unusual species.
Why would a private nuisance claim involving sensitive ornamental plants near a construction site likely succeed if dust harmed them?
The claim would succeed if the dust would have affected ordinary plants, because this establishes the interference as unreasonable, allowing the claimant to recover for the full damage, including to sensitive plants.
