Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/22

Click to flip

22 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Anything that moves / emanates - something blocking signal not enough

Canary Wharf

Physical Damage - eg fumes damaging crops

St. Helens smelting

Must have a property right for standing

Malone v Laskey

Encroachment - eg trees overhanging, balls being annoying

Miller v Jackson

Loss of Amenity - eg dust

Canary Wharf v Hunter

Substantial interference - long period of time or unreasonable times of day

Kennaway v Thompson

N/A isolated events unless they cause actual property damage

British Celanese

Can be short lived but at inconvenient times of day

De Keysers

Must be out of ordinary not everyday living

Baxter v Camden

Sometimes consider locality

Sturges v Bridgman - Bermondsey and belgrave

Practically impossible to claim for loss of amenity in industrial areas

St. Helens smelting v tipping

Planning permission can be considered but only really in respect if locality

Coventry v Lawrence


Gillingham v Medway

Sensitive use of land?

Walter v Selfe : law does not protect elegant and dainty habits



Robinson v Kilbert CF McKinnon Industries

Must be foreseeable kind of damage - eg Cs music studio not foreseeable amount of tech to be disrupted

Network Rail v Morris

Utility of Conduct - generally irrelevant at this stage

Adams v Ursell


Dennis v MOD

Bad motivations / malice

Hollywood v silver fox farm

Defences of Prescription

20 years somewhere from start of cs knowledge of nuisance sturges v Bridgman

Coming to nuisance will not be a defence

Coventry v Lawrence

Statutory authority - full defence

Allen v Gulf oil refinery

Ryland v Fletcher

Non natural use of land (Cambridge)



Accumulation of something might cause mischief in land if escapes (transco says high danger)



It escapes (stannard v gore)



Causes harm of foreseeable kind (Cambridge)

Defences?

Act of 3rd person / stranger Richard v Lothian


Act of god must be really rare (greencock corporation)


Consent by C to bring that thing on land - but negated if released due to Negligence colour quest


Public Nuisance

Affects a class of her majesty’s people - comfort and convenience PYA Quarriers