Preview

Nuisences

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3101 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Nuisences
Defination Of Nuisances * “Unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection, with it.” Winfield & Jolowicz on Tort. * it involves interference with land, the claimant, as you will see, has to have an interest in land. * the aim of private nuisance is to protect interests in land, damages for personal injury are not recoverable under this tort.

Who can sue? * It has traditionally protected interest in land. * Only a person who has some proprietary interest I land. Can maintain an action. It is : i) A landowner ii) An occupier ( whether as tenant, lessee or a person in actual possessions )

For example in cases of Foster -v- Warblington Urban District Council; CA 1906 * A nuisance was caused by the discharge of sewage by the defendant council into oyster beds. The plaintiff was an oyster merchant who had for many years been in occupation of the oyster beds which had been artificially constructed on the foreshore, which belonged to the lord of the manor. The plaintiff excluded everybody from the oyster beds, and nobody interfered with his occupation of the oyster beds or his removal and sale of oysters from them.

* Held: He could sue the defendant Council in nuisance, notwithstanding that he could not prove his title. Stirling LJ: ‘I think, therefore, that, as against a private individual, the plaintiff would have a right of action, and I do not think that this case can be governed by the decision in the case of Corporation of Truro v. Rowe. There the contest arose between the owners of the foreshore and a person who claimed simply to be availing himself of a public right of fishing. Here the contest arises, in my view, between the person who is in occupation of a portion of the foreshore and a wrongdoer. Whether the plaintiff would be able to resist the claims of the owner of the foreshore, whoever he may be, or the owner of a several fishery, if such

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    The court will most likely hold that Mr. Ellis has created a private nuisance by constructing the chicken coop in his yard, because it creates a substantial and unreasonable interference with Mr. Ellis neighbor’s enjoyment of her yard.…

    • 1429 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    No duty to trespassers except not to willfully cause the injury (Mail v. Smith Lumber Co., 287 P. 2d 877 (Wash. 1955)).…

    • 404 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Kelo

    • 23643 Words
    • 95 Pages

    Kelo v. City of New London, 268 Conn. 1, 843 A.2d 500, 2004 Conn. LEXIS 54 (2004)…

    • 23643 Words
    • 95 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Unconscionability

    • 2687 Words
    • 11 Pages

    [ 6 ]. Cobbe v Yeoman 's Row Management Ltd [2008] 1 W.L.R. 1752 Lord Walker 92…

    • 2687 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    LAWS1061 Exam Notes

    • 10741 Words
    • 47 Pages

    The nuisance was a substantial or unreasonable interference with the plaintiff’s right to use of their land.…

    • 10741 Words
    • 47 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    v. Fernandez - A three year old's body was found in a auger on Spur feeding company's property, when he and two other minors where roaming on the company's property. The father of the three year old filed a wrongful death lawsuit under the attractive nuisance doctrine. The courts held it was not necessary for a child to have been killed or maimed before there was a notice that children may have been attracted to the machinery because the unloading operation was near a public highway, unfenced and wholly unprotected from intrusion, and plainly visible at a distance so as to have been alluring to children traveling along the road. This case is best used to argue the Malones case that Ms. Herrera did not take reasonable care to protect trespassing children from harming themselves on her property which was near a public highway and there was no fence surrounding the condition where Maria Malone received her…

    • 668 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jerome, the explanation of legal procedures that may be enforced that are associated with the tragedies that surround Martin are quite intriguing. Specifically, in regards to the coastal property, you suggested the utilization of inverse condemnation. As a matter of fact, this term extends further than the avenue I chose to defend the matter of Martin’s coastal property being condemned for the purposes of the community. Furthermore, eminent domain was the primary focus of the argument I presented of whether the coastal property was justifiably taken from the possession of Martin.…

    • 517 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    [ 29 ]. Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330.…

    • 2525 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    The COE was not overstepping in its requirement of a permit because of its authority under the CWA. The wetland’s inclusion under the jurisdiction of the CWA was protected because of its adjacency to a navigable body of water, and the broad definition of “navigable” under the CWA. The Court ruled that the injunction and permit requirement did not constitute a taking, because of the respondent’s lack of compliance to apply for one. Also, the denial of a permit would not reduce the economic viability of RBH’s 80 acres by 100%. The court relied on scientific deference, because if this wetland could have a significant effect on the adjacent body of navigable water explicitly protected by the CWA, then it is subject to CWA jurisdiction.…

    • 665 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Australian Property Law

    • 63351 Words
    • 254 Pages

    Table of Contents d 5 Torrens Title Lan Introduction 5 Principle of Indefeasibility 5 Key Provisions (RP Act) 5 Deferred v immediate indefeasibility 6 Frazer v Walker 1967 6 Breskvar v Wall (1971) 7 What will attract indefeasibility? 8 Leases: 9 Mercantile Credits Ltd v Shell Co of Australia Ltd (1976) 9 Karacominakis v Big Country Developments (2000) 11 Mortgages: 11 Yazgi v Permanent Custodians Ltd (2007) 11 Volunteers 12 Bogdanovic v Koteff (1988) 12 Rasmussen v Rasmussen [1995] 13 Exceptions to Indefeasibility 14 Fraud Exception: 15 Loke Yew v Port Swettenham Rubber Co Ltd [1913] 15 Assets Co Ltd v Mere Roihi [1905] 16 Schultz v Corwill Properties (1969) 16 Russo v Bendigo Bank Ltd (1993) 17 The In Personam Exception 18 Bahr v Nicolay (No 2) (1988) 18 Mercantile Mutual Life Insurance Co Ltd v Gosper (1991) 20 Vassos v State Bank of South Australia (1993) 20 Special equity cases: 21 Personal equity and breach of trust: 22 Personal Equities and Mistake 23 OTHER EXCEPTIONS; OVERRIDING STATUTES 23 The Register, equitable interests and caveats 26 The Register 26 Bursill Enterprises Pty Ltd v Berger Bros Trading Co Pty Ltd 26 White v Betalli [2007] NSWCA 243 27 Equitable interests and unregistered instruments 27 Barry v Heider (1914) 19…

    • 63351 Words
    • 254 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    • carried on by the owner of the land, the owner's agent or by the person in…

    • 1393 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Adverse Posession Statute

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Plaintiff, Sally Sanders filed a complaint in the circuit court of Williams County against defendant, Fred Williams. Sanders claimed that Williams trespassed on a strip of land where their properties meet. Williams counterclaimed to allege adverse possession. After a bench trial, the defendant was given a judgment in favor of him. The plaintiff filed an appeal based on the fact that the defendant did…

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Tort Paper on Nuisance

    • 3691 Words
    • 15 Pages

    Nuisance is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury…

    • 3691 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Something Random

    • 961 Words
    • 4 Pages

    * Homestead Act: permitted any citizen to claim 160 acres of public land for a small fee after living on it for 5 years…

    • 961 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Yong Joo Lin

    • 531 Words
    • 3 Pages

    6. Defendant demolished No.21 about the beginning of 1939, as a result, No.19 became unsafe for habitation due to the removal of the wall adjoining No.19 and of excavations which caused one of the brick piers of No.19 to slip. The Sanitary Board obtained an order for its demolition.…

    • 531 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays