The defendants purchased a shop in a residential area and used it as a sex shop. Residents claimed in nuisance, and sought an injunction.
Held: The claim raised an arguable cause of action, and the balance of convenience lay in favour of the neighbours.
Vinelott J
[1981] 1 All ER 659, [1981] CLY 2000
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Metropolitan Asylum District Managers v Hill HL 7-Mar-1881
There was an allegation that the managers had been committing an actionable nuisance, alternatively that they had been negligent in and about the construction and maintenance of a hospital for small-pox patients in Hampstead. The trial judge had . .
Applied – Thompson-Schwab v Costaki CA 1956
The sight of prostitutes entering and leaving the defendant’s premises was so offensive as to be actionable in nuisance by a neighbouring owner. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Nuisance
Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.189996
