Case Names and Facts for Nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher.

Includes a table of cases for public and private nusiance as well as rylands v fletcher. For each case it has the facts and the point of law in alphabetical order

HideShow resource information
Preview of Case Names and Facts for Nuisance and Rylands v Fletcher.

First 505 words of the document:

Private Nuisance Cases
Case Name Facts Ratio
Adams v Ursell A fish shop in a residential area was The fact that the activity causing the
(1913) considered to be a nuisance, even though nuisance has some public benefit will not act
closing it would cause hardship to local as a defence.
Allen v Gulf Oil Act of Parliament authorised the building of Where an Act of Parliament authorises an
(1981), an oil refinery. The operation of which activity, and that activity necessarily involves
created a nuisance. creating a nuisance, the defence of
statutory authority will apply, and the claim
will fail.
Bland v Moseley A building was to be erected that would mean Does not protect "things of delight" like a
the claimant had no view, had a restriction of pleasant view or right to light.
air and reduction of light.
Bolton v Stone A cricket ball was knocked over the high Infrequent activities are likely to be
(1951) fence only once every five years. considered unreasonable and therefore
Cambridge Here, chemicals from the tanning process It must be proved that the nuisance
Waters v eventually filtered through the ground and committed by D caused the harm suffered
polluted the claimant's bore hole. by the claimant and that this harm was
Eastern County foreseeable.
Leather 1994
Christie v Davey D became annoyed by the noise from music If D acts deliberately out of spite in order to
lessons next door and responded by banging annoy the claimant, the his activity is likely to
on the walls, beating trays and shouting. be considered unreasonable.
Davey v Harrow Encroaching roots from trees adjoining land Interference can be through the
Corporation had caused damage by subsidence to C's land. encroachment on to the claimants land.
Trees encroaching on to adjoining land
(1958) (whether by branches or roots) and causing
damage then an action for nuisance would
lie against the owner of the land on whose
property the trees stood.
Dennis v Claimants living near an RAF base brought a Public benefit is not a defence but where
Ministry of claim in nuisance for the excessive noise it there is a public benefit, the court may
created. award damages rather than an injunction.
Defence (2003) Damages can be awarded for damage
caused to property, loss in value of land
and/or loss of enjoyment of the land.
Gillingham B.C. Planning permission was granted to use part The character of an area may change if
v Medway Dock of a dockyard as a commercial port. planning permission is granted in a
Neighbours then suffered disturbance from residential area for an industrial
(1993) heavy vehicles using the access 24 hours a development. In this case the area was now
day. an industrial rather than a residential area.

Other pages in this set

Page 2

Preview of page 2

Here's a taster:

Hollywood D objected to C's use of land as a mink farm, If D acts deliberately out of spite in order to
Silver Fox Farm so he fired shotguns near to the property annoy the claimant, the his activity is likely to
knowing that mink eat their young when be considered unreasonable.
v Emmett frightened.
(1936).…read more

Page 3

Preview of page 3

Here's a taster:

St. Helen's Copper smelting resulted in smuts from the Where physical damage occurs, location will
Smelting Co. v process damaging the claimant's shrubs. not be relevant.
Tipping (1865)
Sturges v Vibrations from D's machinery disturbed the The defence of prescription is available
Bridgman (1879) claimant who had bought land next door and however it may fail when the claimant
was using it as a doctor's consulting room. comes to the nuisance, coming to the
nuisance is not a defence which the
defendant can rely on.…read more

Page 4

Preview of page 4

Here's a taster:

Case name Facts Ratio
A.G. for Ontario A pop festival caused noise and Example of a public nuisance.
v Orange
A.G. v PYA Residents living near a quarry were A class of people is a section of the public
disturbed by vibrations from the rather than just individuals, in this case 30
Quarries (1957) explosions and by the dust which spread households were affected.
throughout the district in dry weather.
Castle v St.…read more

Page 5

Preview of page 5

Here's a taster:

Rylands v Fletcher cases
Case name Facts Ratio
Cambridge Here, chemicals from the tanning Can only claim for if its foreseeable.
Water Co. v process eventually filtered through Also; Ian Kennedy J found at first instance that the
the ground and polluted the storage of chemicals by a tanning firm in an industrial
Eastern Counties claimant's bore hole. village was a natural use of land so that the Rule in
Leather plc Rylands v Fletcher did not apply.…read more

Page 6

Preview of page 6

Here's a taster:

Read v Lyons An inspector visiting a munitions Her claim failed primarily because there had been no
(1946), factory was injured in an explosion. "escape" from DD's land to any other property, but
there was also some doubt expressed as to whether
the use of premises for making munitions in time of
war was to be regarded as a non-natural use for the
owner's own purposes.…read more


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all resources »