Summary Tort Law - Private Nuisance (inc. Rylands v Fletcher)
74 views 1 purchase
Course
TORT LAW
Institution
The University Of Manchester (UOM)
Book
Principles of Tort Law
I achieved a high first in this module (78%).
These are my notes for the tort of private nuisance (essentially a summary from the relevant chapter in Principles of Tort Law by Rachel Mulheron)
I. Capacity of claimant to sue
Authority: Hunter v Canary Wharf
C must have a proprietary or possessory interest in the land, which is a substantial link
between the land and C.
Those with standing to sue:
Freehold owner of land- Arscott v Coal Authority
A person with a proprietary interest in an easement over land- Transco plc v
Stockport MBC
A tenant: Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd (allowed)
A landlord whose reversionary interest is interfered with: Hunter
A licensee with exclusive possession- Tinseltime Ltd v Davies
A person with exclusive possession to land, which is valid against all but the true
owner of the land- Foster v Warblington UDC
A ‘tolerated trespasser’, who, whilst remaining in the premises, has actual and
exclusive possession- Pemberton v Southwark LBC
Those with no standing to sue:
Lodgers- Hunter
Children or relatives- permitted in Khorasandjian v Bush overrules in Hunter.
A worker who suffers interference at the work-place- hypothetical example in
Hunter
Spouses who not have name on prop title- Malone v Laskey approved in Hunter
Contractual right to access/use the property, but nothing more-Tate and Lyle v GLC
A ‘mere trespasser’ or a temp occupier- Alegrete Shipping Co Inc v Intl oil Pollution
Compensation Fund
Where the nuisance occurs before C is in the area, and continues after C moves in and no
double compensation placed on D- Delaware mansions v Westminster CC
II. Capacity of defendant to be sued (created, adoption/ continuation of the nuisance)
Authority Coventry v Lawrence- creates the nuisance
Narrow View: Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan- D must be in possession and control of the
land from which the nuisance proceeds and D is liable for a nuisance existing on his
property.
Wider View: Nuisance doesn’t have to exist on D’s property nor arise out of his land.
Includes trespassers and protesters (Olympic Delivery Authy v Persons Unknown). And D
may merely own or control a thing which causes the nuisance but not own the actual land.
Adoption and/or continuance of the nuisance:
Created by others, but D, as owner/occupier, has carried it on, despite having the time and
means to do so.
Good action where the continuer has deeper pockets than the person string the nuisance.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller laelaw. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $6.46. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
