Karteikarten
nuisance
Karten in diesem Stapel (18)
- 1private nuisanceunr/able use of man of his land to the detriment of his neighbour- Miller
-private nuisance focuses around interference with land/property
(can take many forms; one property to another, must come from land rather than builldings)
but main characteristics are; protection of land/property from unr/able interference - 2rights and interests in property-to do with enjoyment of land, considered fundamental a person could only enjoy protection of this tort if they had exclusive possession.
-places limitations on availability on an action for visitors, lodgers etc - 3is a proprietary right in land required for action in private nuisnace?yes- Malone v laskey; C was wife of leaseholder and not entitled to exclusive possession- injured but claim rejected as she didnt have proprietary interest.
no- khorasandijan v bush; daughter of property owner harassed by D. action succeeded despite no proprietary interest.
Hunter v Canary Wharf- occupation of a home was sufficient basis for a claim; HL reversed this and reinstated a proprietary interest. - 4unr/able use of land-the use of the land which is the source of the nuisance is unr/able.
-foreseeability: element of r/ableness so interference with Cs enjoyment of land that is a foreseeable result of Ds use of land will be unr/able.
-courts consider factors in determing whether its unr/able - 51) character of neighbourhood-what is r/able depends on location in which it takes place. it might be unr/able to operate a steelworks in an industrial area but not in midst of housing development.
-character of neighbourhood is only a consideration if nuisance complained of concerns inconvenience to C (loss of sleep etc)
-if nuisance causes physical damage character of neighbourhood is irrelevant (St Helens) - 62) sensitivity of C-existence of nuisance is determined by considering its effect on a r/able person and ordinary use of land.
-If C was unusually sensitive or was using his own land for an unusual purpose that made it particularly sensitive to disruption, wont be able to rely on nuisance unless action complained of would have disrupted a r/able person
-Robinson v Kilvert: - 7Q- is the C unusually sensitive or he is using his land in a way that is particularly susceptible to harm?yes- is the nuisance complained of one that would effect the ordinary use or enjoyment of land?
No- no nuisance due to Cs unusual sensitivity
-to be actionable a nuisance must be continuous- doesnt mean it has to occur all the time without interruption but there must be some continuity to the disturbance. - 83) public benefitgreater the general utility of Ds actions, less likely it is that it will amount to an actionable nuisance.
-building works that benefit the community may disturb residents but public benefit will outweigh inconvenience - 94) malice of Dmalice on part of D contributes to liability.
-if Ds acts out of hostility/spite his actions are likely to fall within private nuisance- held that it is not a legitimate use of Ds house to use it for purpose of vexing his neighbour (Christie v Davie) - 10damageprivate nuisance is not actionable per se, C must suffer some harm/injury/damage to succeed with a claim.
-Hunter v Canary wharf: identified 3 categories of damage that give rise to a claim;
1) encroachment onto neighbours land
2) physical injury to land
3) interference with enjoyment of land - 11public nuisancematerially affects the r/able comfort and convenience of life of a class of her majesty's subjects- AG v PYA Quarries
- 122 requirements that must be satisfied1) the nuisance has affected a class of people
(distinction with private is the effect of the nuisance not the nature of it)
e.g. people with proprietary interest affected by private nuisance- Hunter
e.g. class of her majestys subjects affected - 13AG v PYA quarriesargument that nuisance only affected some local people and so lacked a sufficiently public nature was rejected. lord denning said public nuisance was one which;
where it would be unr/able for one person to put a stop to the nuisance - 14what has amounted to a class of people-local communities (Ruffel)
-groups of people with common interest (Ong)
users of public highway - 15C has suffered special damagealthough public nuisance requires inconvenience to a class of people, an action can only be brought if a particular indiviual(s) suffers damage over and above the general inconvenience casued to the class.
-limits the multitude of claims that would succeed if public nuisance was actionable on basis of interference only
-following types of damage fall within scope of public nuisance;
1) personal injury/ discomfort/ inconvenience
2) damage to property
3) economic loss - 16defences- prescription1) prescription available to private nuisance only
-claim that D has acquired the right to act in a way that constitutes a private nuisance b'cus its been doing so for 20 years
Sturges v Bridgman: not negated by prescription bcus nuisance only started once consulting room was built. - 17defences- statutory authorityif Ds conduct was authorised by statute it is likely to provide a defence against claims of nuisance.
-covers planning permission- Wheeler
(not constitute nuisance) - 18remedies- damages and injunctions-damages are available to compensate c for physical damage to his land and in relation to personal discomfort/inconvenience.
-generally injunction wont be awarded if damages are.
-abatement- C rectifies the nuisance themselves
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Karteikarten am nuisance, erstellt von holmull am 05/05/2015.
- Erstellt von
- holmull
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung