⇒ Private nuisance is an unreasonable, substantial and foreseeable interference with another’s land or its use or enjoyment

⇒ The intereference with another's enjoyment of their land can be through some activity e.g. by playing the drums

⇒ The intereference with another's enjoyment of their land can be through some state of affairs e.g. a tree in your garden may overhang into your neighbours garden and drop its leaves on their garden

⇒ The intereference with another's enjoyment of their land can be through some isolated incident e.g. if there is a flood from my land onto your land

• However, in such 'isolated incident' cases it would probably be better to sue in negligence or in the tort of Rylands v Fletcher, not nuisance

⇒ See the case of Midwood & Co v Manchester Corp [1905]

⇒ Nuisance needs damage, whereas trespass does not i.e. nuisance must have an effect

• In Kelsen v Imperial Tobacco 1957 (the projecting advertising hoarding case), the claimant also pleaded nuisance. However, there was no nuisance as the defendant's actions had no damaging effect

⇒ Physical damage to land e.g. factory pollution kills your plants

⇒ Reduced use/enjoyment of land e.g. neighbour playing the drums

⇒ Not damage to chattels or people (except where it is evidence of the above two e.g. neighbour’s ball always kicked into garden, so you don't use garden for fear of personal injury → that would reduce enjoyment of the land and therefore may be able to amount to nuisance)

⇒ In other words, the interference with another's land must be something that objectively goes against what we should have to put up with

⇒ Walter v Selfe (1851): "the interference must be more than fanciful"

• Also see the cases of Andreae v Selfridge & Co [1938] and Baxter v Camden LBC [2001]

⇒ There will be no nuisance if the claimant is unusually sensitive

• See, for example, the cases of Heath v Mayor of Brighton (1908) and Robinson v Kilvert [1889]

⇒ Location: You should expect more noise, for example, next to a stadium than next to a library

• See, for example, the cases of Lawrence v Fen Tigers (2014) and St Helens Smelting v Tipping (1865)

⇒ Planning Permission: Planning permission both avoids nuisance prospectively (i.e. prevents future cases of nuisance) and can change the character of a neighbourhood

• See, for example, the cases of Hunter v Canary Wharf [1997] and Gillingham Borough Council v Medway Dock [1993]. However, compare with the case of Wheeler v JJ Saunders Ltd [1996]

⇒ Whether the defendant acted with malice: if you use your property in normal ways then that will likely be fine (i.e. no nuisance), but if you are using it a particular way out of spite for your neighbours then the court will not like that and will likely find there to be nuisance

• See, for example, the cases of Bradford Corp v Pickles [1895], Christie v Davey [1893], and Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett [1936]

⇒ In other words, the defendant's interference must have been a foreseeable consequence of his/her actions

• See, for example, the cases of Network Rail v Morris (2004) and Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather [1994]

⇒ A person with an interest in the land affected can sue. For example:

• A person entitled to exclusive possession of the affected land
• A reversioner of the affected land e.g. a Landlord who is not in the property can sue for damage to their reversionary interest
• Those with easements and profits à prendre. Lord Goff in Hunter v Canary Wharf: “[n]uisance is a tort against land, including interest in land such as easements and profits”

⇒ The person who occupies or controls the land from which the nuisance emanates if they are responsible for the nuisance

⇒ The occupier of the land who creates the nuisance

⇒ The occupier of the land who authorises the nuisance

⇒ The occupier of the land who knows, or ought to know, of the nuisance an can reasonably stop it

• For example, acts by trespassers (Sedleigh-Dunfield v O’Callaghan (1940))
• For example, acts of nature (Goldman v Hargrave (1967))
• For example, acts of independent contractors

⇒ The defendant won't be found liable for nuisance if his/her activity is authorised by the state e.g. Allen v Gulf Oil [1981]

⇒ The defendant won't be found liable for nuisance if there is prescription (20 years) i.e. if he/she has been carrying out the nuisance for 20 years without complaint then nobody can sue him/her for that 'nuisance'. E.g. Sturges v Bridgman [1879]

⇒ Damages e.g. Bone v Searle [1975]

⇒ Injunction e.g. Lawrence v Fen Tigers [2014] and Dennis v Ministry of Defence [2003]