100168872Business Law Assignment #2
A. Principle For Which the Case Stands
This case regards the legal principle of private nuisance.
B. Name and Citation
The parties involved in this case are Mynott v. British Columbia (ministry of transportation), 2011 BCSC 258. The date for this case is March 2nd, 2011 and took place in Cranbrook, British Columbia. It took place in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. I found this article on the Supreme Court of British Columbia website, (courts.gov.bc.ca). C. Facts
The plaintiff’s are Scott and Caroline Mynott who own a home in Goat Canyon Road in Erickson, British Columbia which is near Creston. The house is located near a river crossing which at one point had a bridge to access the other side. The bridge is no longer there and has now become a small beach area known as “The point”. Creston has a very large cherry industry and to keep up with demand they hire young people, including students, to help pick the cherries in the summer seasons. The Cherry Growers Association for some reason has a strong tie with Quebec and allows a program to allow summer work opportunities for groups of students from Quebec to come over here for the summer and pick the cherries. This has been going on for years, but only recently have they began to gather at “the point” and begin illegal activities of various sorts such as drinking, drug use, and even acts of explicitly sexual content. Apparently this has been noticeably going on since 2002 and is increasingly getting worse each year. People accessing the point had begun using the Mynott’s property as a passage to get to the point and even parking vehicles on their property. The Mynott’s began to get fed up and began documenting the illegal activity with cameras (both still and video capture). Since there was no proper cleanup crew or job specifically entitled to keep this area clean the Mynott’s not only had to deal with the excessive noise and...