#17497 - Nominate Torts Nuisance Public And Private - Tort Law: Nominate Torts

NUISANCE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE • Very different in nature • Contrast dramatically Public nuisance • creates strict liability as we're dealing with member of the public who are entitled to go about their business safely. Thus landowners must ensure that their property is safe • Generally adjoining public highway property causing hazard • Large number of public affected • EG garth brooks concert Private • - two parties - p and d - generally neighbouring landowners • Usually a complaint about what defendant is doing on or with his alnd • Physical damage to property • Or disruptions or annoyance Definition Connolly v South 0f Ireland Asphalt.co 1977 - An unreasonable interference with, disturbance of or annoyance to another person in exercise of his rights. - If these rights belong to the person as a member of the public, the negligence (act or omission) is a nuisance. - If the rights relate to the ownership or occupation of land or - (easement or profit) or other right enjoyed in relation to land - the act or omission is a private nuisance - An easement is a right over land eg. Hunting or fishing right PUBLIC NUISANCE • Obstructing or causing inconvenience or damage to the public in exercise of common rights • Materially affecting the comfort and convenience of a class of people though not necessary to establish that everyone is affected • It's a crime to create it • Generally prosecuted by AG • Unless P suffers 'special/particular damage' - more affected than everyone else • Person injury - AG v Mayo COCO • Property • Loss of opportunity (PEL) Boyd v Great Great Northern railway Doctor lost medical fee of ten shillings due to adelay at a level crossing caused by public nuisance SPECIAL DAMAGES Smith v Wilson Farmer purchased car to travel to market when - normal route obstructed after D demolished a bridge and erected a fence. Can a single incident amount to a public nuisance? Most are ongoing. Castle v St Augustine Link ltd 1922 P hit by golf ball struck by D's golf club. Blinded as a result. Golf course negligent in signs. P recovered for personal injury. Southport Corp v Esso 1954 - Single serious incident would suffice to meet requirements of public nuisance Generally extreme / unusual CATEGORIES OF PUBLIC NUISANCE - Vary from diseases, to smells, to noise to concerts. Cunningham v McGrath Bros 1964 Ladder left on footpath lead to obstruction Wall v Morrissey 1969 Dug trench in road Cunningham v Whelan 1918 Large no. of animals obstructing road DANGERS ON ROAD • Not confined to obstruction • Danger on road constitutes nuisance Walsh v Morgan - Parking sign on footpath Stewart v Patrick Hospital - Gaspipe protruding onto footpath Mullan v Forrester 1921 - Allowing wall to collapse onto road Duty of land owner towards individuals using a public highway - Falling of a tree on an occupier's land causing a hazard to public With public nuisance liability comes strict liability Lynch v Hetherton 1990 Important as it reviews all authorities in area. Gives modern position in Irish law Tree collapses on vehicle while driving on country road. The occupier accepted that there was a duty on him to prevent the falling of trees. Q arose as to when does this duty arise? Court said - What a reasonable and prudent land owner would take to guard against danger of damage being done by a falling tree What's a reasonable prudent land owner? Applied two cases: Caminer v Northern and London Investment Trust Court said Must be established by P as a matter of probability that the land owner should have been aware of the danger. If P can show aproper inspection of the tree would have revealed the danger and forewarned the owner. Lord Reid: Test - Would a countryman without expert knowledge but