Unlawful (unreasonable) interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land
Types of private nuisance
Loss of amenity nuisance (caused by noise, smell, vibration or smoke)
Material damage nuisance (dangerous state of affairs on D's land causes significant physical damage to C's land)
Claimant in a nuisance action
Must have an interest in the land, including being an owner or a tenant but not a member of the owner's family such as a child who has no legal interest in the property
Focus of a nuisance action
Reasonableness of the interference caused to C, not whether D took reasonable care
D is at fault because there is some unreasonable interference
The fact that the D has taken all reasonable care will not in itself exonerate him
A defendant can also be liable where the nuisance is a result of natural causes which he is aware of but fails to deal with
Elements of a private nuisance
Unlawful (unreasonable) use of land
Locality factor
Duration of the nuisance
Seriousness of the interference- inconvenience v physical damage
Sensitivity of the claimant
Motive and malice of the defendant
Social benefit
The court has to balance the conflicting interests of neighbouring owners. There must be a 'balance of interests' of the parties
Any direct interference on someone's land would be trespass
Defences for private nuisance
Coming to the nuisance is not a defence
Statutory authority
Planning permission
Prescription - tolerated for 20 years
Remedies available for nuisance
Injunctions
Abatement
Damages (loss of enjoyment)
Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
Essentially an extension of the law of nuisance to isolated escapes from land
Originally a strict liability offence no requirement to show that D was at fault
Any damage caused by an escape had to be reasonably foreseeable, not the escape itself
Elements to claim under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher