Where and what is private nuisance defined as?
Private nuisance is defined in common law as an indirect, substantial, and unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land.
What are the 5 (1/2) rules of the tort?
- C must be able to sue D
- Indirect interference
- Interference with C’s common and ordinary use of land
- Interference must be substantial
- Interference must be unlawful
+ there are defences
Who can sue?
C must be able to sue D
Hunter v Canary Wharf - C must proprietary legal rights in the land to sue.
Who can be sued?
C must be able to sue D
Tetley v Chitty - D can only sued if he is the creator of the nuisance or the owner/occupier of the land
Case law for physical damage (i.e. property damage)
Indirect interference
Sedleigh Denfield v O’ Callaghan - indirect interfence can come from things like physical damage
Case law for non-physical damage
Indirect interference
Christie v Davey - Non-physical things like noise can be indirect interference
Wheeler v Saunders - Non physical things like smell can be indirect interference
Case law for Continuing interference
Indirect interference
Leakey v National Trust- continuing nuisance can occur where D fails to take precautions to stop a hazard from interfering with other land
What do D’s actions need to be doing?
They need to be affecting C’s common and ordinary use of the land
Case law for abnormal senstivity.
Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd. v Morris- If C has suffered due to abnormal sensitivity of their land D wasn’t affecting a common and ordinary use of that land
Case law for recreational activities
AG v Doughty- Blocking a view is not interfering with the “use or enjoyment” of the land*
Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd - Watching TV isn’t a fundimental use of land*
*so D wasn’t affecting a C&O use of the land
Case law for substantial interference
Hasley v Esso Petroleum
Non-physical damage must make it physically unpleasant to be on the land to be substantial
Physical damage is always substantial
Case law for going beyond C&O use
Interference must be unlawful
Fearn v Tate Galleries - an unlawful interference is one that goes beyond common and ordinary usage
Case law for locality
Sturges v Bridgeman shows that we should take into consideration the type of area to decide if the use is C&O for that area
Case law for duration
Halsey v Esso Petroleum - shows that we should also consider the duration and the timing to see if its C&O
Case law for malice
Christe v Davey shows that if D is using the land with bad intentions this makes the use uncommon
What are the 2 defences to Private nuisance?
- Prescription
- Planning Permission
Case law for perscription
Sturges v Bridgman shows that if D has carried out the nuisance for 20 years consecutively, D is prescribed the right to continue
Case law for Planning Permission
Wheeler v Saunders shows that if D has planning permissions it grants D a chance to show his use has become C&O for the area
What are the 3 remedies?
Perpetual or partial Injunction
Damages
Abatement
What is an injunction (all kinds)
an injunction is where D is stopped from doing something or D is made to do something
A perpetual injunction is where D completely stops the action
Partial limits what D can do
What are damages
Coventry v Lawrence - Damages are awarded where C has suffered a loss or discomfort
What is abatement?
Letting C do something to prevent nuisance i.e. letting C cut down tree branches
