Torts on Land - CASE LIST

Página 1

Rylands v Fletcher - case involved adjacent landowners - one had old mines, the other built a reservoir - this caved in and flooded the mines - there was (1) accumulation, (2) escape, (3) a non-natural use, (4) damage and (5) an absence of any defence. Blackburn J - the person who brings and keeps on his land anything which is likely to cause mischief and it escapes is prima facie liable for all damage which is the natural consequence of that escape.

(1) Accumulation - Cosgrove v Ryan - overhead wires can be an accumulation of electricity

AG v Corke - people can be an accumulation - gypsy caravaners.

Brady v Warren - animals can be accumulated - domesticated foxes.

Healy v Bray UDC - natural accumulation of rocks will not see the defendant be held liable.

(2) Escape - Read v Lyons - injured by explosion on premises of defendant - no escape to third party premises - no liability

Charing v Cross - escape onto public highway is possible

(3) Non-natural use - Rickards v Lothian - "some special use bringing with it increased danger to others" - cannot be the ordinary use

Ross v Feddon - domestic water usage for plumbing was a natural use.

Mason v Levy Auto - storage of flammable material in a residential area was a non-natural use.

Rylands v Fletcher - accumulation of water for reservoir was a non-natural use.

Hale v Jennings - a fairground "chair-o-plane" was a non-natural use.

(4) Damage - can be (1) damage to chattels, (2) Damage to property, or (3) personal injury

(1) Damage to chattels - Jones v Fesinog Failway - spark set hay on fire - damage to chattels was recoverable.

(2) Damage to property - Rylands v Fletcher - damage to property was recoverable.

Cambridge Water - damage can't be too remote - here, chemicals seeped onto water and travelled 9 miles - too remote

(3) Personal injury - potentially recoverable in Healy v Bray UDC - not recoverable in the UK in Transpo v Stockport

(4) Pure economic loss? Said no in Weller v Foot and Mouth institute but may be different in modern era.

(5) Defences - (1) Consent - Victor Weston v Kenny - water escaped from apartment - shower left on - consented to showers.

Consent is reduced by s.34 of civil liability act - must show that D is not liable by contract or that P waived right.

(2) Novus Actus Interveniens - Act of God - Nichols v Marshland - heaviest storm in living memory was an act of god. AG v Cory Bros - a severely heavy rain storm - not an act of god -

Act of Stranger - Perry v Kendricks - cara blown up by children setting it on fire - damage must be mischievous, deliberate and conscious act of a stranger.

(3) Mutual benefit - Carstairs v Taylor - leaks from showers but everyone in flats benefited from having showers.

(4) Special sensitivity of plaintiff - Dunn v Birmingham Canal - cannot create a danger and then sue when harm transpires.

(5) Statutory authority - authorised to accumulate or cause an escape.

(6) Necessity - rarely arises.

Trespass to Land

O'Byrne v Davoren - if you are sitting on a wall and are pushed, you have not committed a trespass as it was an involuntary action - must be voluntary, need not intend to trespass - but if you think you can walk on land to shoot, that is voluntary and will be a trespass.

Possession short of ownership is all that is required.

Hegan v Carolan - broke lock to enter property but cared for the property and grazed cattle there - able to sue in trespass when another entered the property.

Whelan v Madigan - landlord broke into his tenant's property with a screwdriver and took chairs and caused some damage - this was trespass against the tenant.

Definition of Land - everything up to heaven and by analogy, down to hell which can be used for reasonable enjoyment

Bernstein v Skyviews [1978] - sky-photos of plaintiffs house was a trespass to his land.

Kelsen v Imperial Tobacco - a billboard encroaching 1 inch on plaintiffs land was a trespass.

Clifton v Viscount Bury - shooting bullets through airspace was not a trespass.

Wandsworth v United Telephone - telephone cables could amount to a trespass.

Lawful Authority - DPP v McMahon - entering premises as an undercover garda - authority to come on premises to buy alcohol but not to investigate - once you exceed your authority you become a trespasser.

Webb v Ireland - lawful entrant until you start digging - then you are a trespasser.

Remedies - Re-entry - allowed to re-occupy your property

Ejectment - allowed to force them out of the property

Mesne Profits - recover lost rental profits from property

Damages- unpopular to allow someone to pay for infringing on your property rights -

Shelfer v City of London Electric - defendant is not entitled to ask the court to sanction his doing so by purchasing his neighbours rights - leaving his neighbour with the trespass

Injunction - popular as stops the trespass and prevents from further trespass in future.

Defences - Consent - Hurst v Picture Theatre - contractually allowed to be in cinema by consenting and giving him a ticket

DPP v McMahon - consent is good defence until breach of right of entry

Necessity - Cope v Sharpe - damaged property to prevent the spread of fire - no trespass committed

Lawful Authority - DPP v McMahon - narrowly construed.

Nuisance

Lanigan v Barry - stud farm opened next to a racetrack which had planning permission - the intensity of the racing intensified in recent years subsequent to the planning permission - nuisance is the interference for a substantial length of time by an occupier of a property with the lawful use and enjoyment of a neighbouring property. Must be a real and definite infringement on comfort and enjoyment of land. Cannot be trivial or passing annoyance. Planning permission will not vitiate a nuisance

Connolly v South of Ireland Asphalt - Nuisance is an act or omission which amounts to unreasonable interference with, disturbance of, or annoyance to another person in exercise of their rights.

Elements to nuisance - (1) Act or Omission by the Defendant (2) Damage or Interference with Plaintiff's Rights in Land (3) Unreasonableness and (4) Causation --> must also consider defences and special remedies.

Public Nuisance - can be right of way, noise, loss of light, congestion, a sick person in public etc. -- must show special or particular damage -

Mullan v Forrester - wall fell on plaintiff and injured him - on public highway - he suffered the specific harm - sufficient.

Boyd v GN Railway - doctor stopped at railway crossing for long time - everyone suffered but he lost out as a doctor.

Requires (1) Obstruction - Herring v Metropolitan Board of Works - a significant imposition - determined by reasonableness

or (2) Danger - Wandsworth v Railtrack - pigeons roosted on bridge crossing - became slippery and dangerous - also includes signs left unattended, or holes dug.

Private Nuisance -

(1) Act or Omission by Defendant - Southport v Esso - who can be sued? Occupiers - ship ran ashore - sued for damage to foreshore when oil was released to avoid explosion.

Coventry v Lawrence - landlord sued in respect of a noise racetrack adjacent to the property - discussion on (1) prescription (2) "coming to the nuisance" (3) actual use of premises when considering the locality (4) planning permission and (5) approach of considering whether to grant an injunction.

Vitalograph v Ennis UDC - landlord can be liable if they fail to abate a nuisance for which they are aware and responsible for. They adopted the nuisance.

(2) Damage or Interference with Rights in Land - Who can sue?

Hanrahan v Merck, Sharpe and Dohme - must simply be in occupation and be affected by nuisance

Molumby v Kearns - occupation is sufficient for an action in nuisance.

Can be (1) interference with servitudes - rights of way, access to water, etc.

(2) material damage - St. Helens Smelting v Tipping - damage to trees and shrubs was sufficient -

Halpin v Tara Mines - causing cracks was enough.

Hanrahan v Merck, Sharpe and Dohme - personal injury - harm caused by fumes etc.

(3) Interference with Use and Enjoyment - more frequent -

O'Kane v Campbell - shop could not stay open 24 hours - old people have right to enjoy a night's sleep -

Bone v Seal - not reasonable to be expected to put up with smell from nearby pig farm -

Hanrahan v MSD - sensible discomfort, including the affection of the nerves and senses of such nature as would materially diminish the comfort and enjoyment of, or cause reasonable annoyance to, a reasonable person living in that area.

Unreasonableness - 1) Nature of the Locality -

New Imperial v Johnson - necessary incidents of social life in the city is a certain amount of recreation and innocent amusement.

Lanigan v Barry - nature of a locality can change over time - yet planning permission is not enough to allow nuisance.

(2) Purpose of the Defendant -

Christie v Davey - Plaintiff gave music lessons and home and defendant bashed bin lids together to ruin the lessons - motivated by malice so liable for nuisance.

Hollywood Silver Fox v Emmett - defendant shot guns in direction of plaintiff's fox farm to ensure that they would not breed - same outcome as above.

(3) Duration of the Nuisance

Leeman v Montague - chickens and cockerels regularly cawing at 2am for a long duration - nuisance - residential area.

Bolton v Stone - 6 cricket balls in 30 years was not a nuisance - also social utility of cricket.

(4) Sensitive Plaintiff - Robinson v Kilvert - heat-sensitive paper case- hyper-sensitive case.

McKinnion v Walker - orchids - but all flowers would be killed by fumes - so not hypersensitive

(5) Social Utility of Conduct - Clifford v Drug Treatment Board - did not allow expansion of rehab centre but did not close what was already in place.

Causation - typically hard to prove in practice - Hanrahan v MSD - expert evidence was conflicting as to causation - but question is typically obvious on issue of causation.

Defences - (1) Legislative Authority - Kelly v Dublin CC - authorised to cause nuisance in building a road, but storage of trucks caused dust nuisance to plaintiff and they did not have authority to do so.

(2) Prescription - committing nuisance on regular basis to be allowed to do so - Sturges v Bridgman - made noise, plaintiff built a surgery on property - asked noise to stop - claimed that plaintiff came to the nuisance - failed to avail of defence

Bliss v Hall - candle factory omitted bad smells for years - still allowed to entitled to fresh air. No prescription.

(3) Consent - plaintiff consent to nuisance - Thomas v Lewis - accepted grazing rights in place of a quarry being built - could not then complain of the quarry.

Special Remedies - 1. Abatement - typically illegal as trespass, but Osborn v Lewis - if putting out a fire, abatement may be valid.

2. Distress Damage Feasant - holding property until nuisance is stopped or paid for.

Natural Nuisance - typically no liability but should owe a measured duty to prevent harm

Vernon Knight v Cornwall - measured duty owed - must take reasonable steps to prevent your land affecting neighbouring land - duty must be fair, just and reasonable - must have regard for foreseeable risks and costs of preventative measures and their availability

Ambrose v Shevlin - issue with flooding and drains - first flood was not foreseeable but second was - owed a measured duty