Nuisance
Nuisance
Nuisance
Understanding Nuisance
B. Damage and Remedies
C. The Concept of Reasonableness
D. Public Nuisance
E. Private Nuisance
F. Who can sue / be sued?
G. Remedies
H. Defences
• It is a branch of the law of tort
• Purpose: To provide comfort to persons who
have proprietary interests in land as well as to
members of society, through control of
environmental conditions
• It is an interference to the plaintiff’s interest on
the use (or enjoyment but not possession!) of
his land, by the defendant, without entry.
Nuisance is distinguished from trespass:
Criminal proceeding
Claim is brought by PP on behalf of the Govt
Civil proceeding (without special damage)
S.8(1) Govt Proceedings Act 1956
Exception if claim made by a local authority
MPPP v Boey Siew Than [1979]
3 types of damage:
1. Interference with the use of land
2. Interference with the comfort or enjoyment
of land
3. Physical damage
Interference with the use of land
Known as amenity nuisance
Feeling discomfort
No formula
Case-by-case basis
WoonTan Kan & Ors v Asian Rare Earth Sdn Bhd
Dato’ Dr Harnam Singh v Renal Link (KL) Sdn Bhd
ATERIAL / PHYSICAL DAMAGE
Recoverable only if it’s amounts to
substantial damage
Substantial interference is also a question of
fact
Minor substantial is not actionable
Goh Chat Ngee & 3 ors v TohYan & Anor
Hotel Continental Sdn Bhd v Cheong FattTze Mansion Sdn Bhd
P must also prove the interference is unreasonable
6 factors determining unreasonableness:
Christie v Davey
Hollywood Silver Fox Farm Ltd v Emmett
Bradford Corporation v Pickles
Only the person who has a proprietory or
possessory interest in the land can sue:
Landowner
Occupier – tenant, licensee (in possession)
Reversioner
Spouse or children of the occupier, guests,
lodgers or workers have no entitlement to
sue.
Malone v Laskey
Hunter v Canary wharf Ltd
1. Creator
2. Occupier
3. Landowner / landlord
4. Local authority / Government
1. Damages
P can recover for physical loss, depreciation in
value and business loss.
2. Injunction
In order to prevent the nuisance from
continuing.
1. Prescription
Sturges v Bridgman [1879]
2. Statutory authority
Manchester Corporation v Farnworth [1930]
Allen v Gulf Oil Refining Ltd [1981]
3. Other defences:
Necessity, consent, defence of property and
contributory negligence
The lecturer can be contacted at:
[email protected]