The term ‘watercourse’ did not include an estuary or a river. The history of such legislation required that restricted interpretation. Accordingly, a notice requiring abatement of a nuisance served by a Health authority on a water undertaker, was not validly served, where it depended upon the estuary being a watercourse. There had been no obligation … Continue reading Falmouth and Truro Port Health Authority v South West Water Limited: CA 30 Mar 2000
On an application under the 1936 Ac, provided that the field benefited council tenants (which it clearly did) it did not matter that it also benefited other people within the local community. Denning J said: ‘The next question is whether the order [that was the compulsory purchase order] is invalid because, in addition to houses … Continue reading HE Green and Sons v Minister of Health (No 2): 1948
In a domestic tribunal such as that a disciplinary hearing, all that is required is that the three basic requirements of natural justice be fulfilled; namely (1) that the person should know the nature of the accusation against him or her; (2) that . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The defendants appealed against orders relating to the construction of a sewage pipe through their garden under powers given under the Act. The defendant had later blocked the pipe and the authority sought to recover the costs of repair. He claimed that the pipe was a drain, not a sewer, and had therefore been laid … Continue reading London Borough of Bromley v Morritt: CA 21 Jun 1999
A female tenant endured six years of misery caused by cockroaches, described as a quite appalling infestation for which she was in no way responsible. Held: The court was not satisfied that the dismissal of the tenant’s claim was the right result which the law ought to reach and that the tenant ought to have … Continue reading Habinteg Housing Association v Jones: CA 1995
The plaintiff brought an action for nuisance against the local authority for having discharged insufficiently treated effluent into the river Derwent. Held: The plaintiffs: ‘have a perfectly good cause of action for nuisance, if they can show that the defendants created or continued the cause of the trouble; and it must be remembered that a … Continue reading Pride of Derby and Derbyshire Angling Association Ltd v British Celanese Ltd: CA 1953
The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business. Held: The planning system is a regulatory system as envisaged in X (Minors), such that there should be no private … Continue reading Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay: CA 30 Jul 1997
A Local Authority found guilty of a statutory nuisance is not thereby liable for a civil damages suit. Citations: Times 26-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 998, [1997] 1 WLR 956, (1997) 29 HLR 640, [1997] Env LR 157 Links: Bailii Statutes: Public Health Act 1936 Part II (Nuisance etc) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – … Continue reading Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) and Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Hackney: CA 19 Nov 1996
COMPENSATION – Damage caused to bungalow close to new sewer and trees – whether damage caused by works connected with sewer or by trees acting on clay beneath foundations – Held sewer works to blame – Public Health Act 1936, s.278. Citations: [2001] EWLands LCA – 44 – 1997 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Lumb v United Utilities Water Ltd: LT 7 Jun 2001
The council appealed against a decision that the crown court had jurisdiction to extend the time for appeal against refusal of a private hire vehicle licence. Held: The court did not have the jurisdiction it used: ‘The terms of the section 300 of the Public Health Act 1936 are, in my view clear. A fixed … Continue reading Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council v Latif: Admn 13 Feb 2009
A complaint of statutory nuisance laid before the magistrates must contain even if in summary form, similar details as would appear in an abatement notice, including the capacity in which the defendant is served and the steps required to be taken to abate the nuisance complained of. The defence available under section 99 was available … Continue reading Warner v Lambeth London Borough Council: QBD 26 Mar 1984
The court asked whether proceedings under s99 were civil or criminal. Held: ‘the proper interpretation of this section [section 99] leads to the conclusion that the individual can by information invoke section 94′ The offence was under s94 initiated by complaint under s99. Section 99 enabled an individual to bring proceedings by information in a … Continue reading Regina v Newham Justices, ex parte Hunt etc: CA 1976
Action was brought by the Council in respect of an alleged statutory nuisance caused by flooding. Under section 94 of the 1875 Act they could serve an abatement notice on the person by whose ‘act default or sufferance’ the nuisance had arisen. The authority argued that the nuisance had arisen by the ‘default’ of the … Continue reading Clayton v Sale Urban District Council: 1926
Access to the plaintiff’s motor repair business was interfered with by work to reconstruct a sewer. Whilst access was still possible it required a long detour and there was no physical interference with the entrance to the premises. Held: If a private individual had interfered with access as the statutory authority had done then there … Continue reading Leonidis v Thames Water Authority: 1979
A watercourse became silted by natural causes and the local authority served an abatement notice on the landowner, who failed to respond, and when prosecuted relied on a proviso which excluded from liability ‘any person other than the person by whose act or default the nuisance arises or continues.’ Held: Absent any relevant legal duty … Continue reading Neath Rural District Council v Williams: QBD 1951
Maghull Brook passed under a densely populated part of Merseyside, in an enclosed culvert constructed in about 1958. The question was whether this part had become a sewer before 1 April 1974, because of the culverting work. The parties discussed which was responsible for its maintenance, being successors to the authorities who had orginally constructed … Continue reading Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council v United Utilities Water Ltd: CA 31 Jul 2001
A public right away could not be presumed to have been granted by the owner of land adjoining a public highway merely from the erection of fences or hedges on the side of a highway. There is no simple rule that the land was deemed to have been dedicated to public use ‘from hedge-to-hedge’. Some … Continue reading Hale v Norfolk County Council: CA 17 Nov 2000
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision to serve an abatement notice in respect of premises where the normal noise incidents of living were heard in neighbouring flats, which notices were to be abated by noise insulation. Held: The contention that a lack of adequate sound insulation can cause premises to be in such … Continue reading Vella v London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 14 Nov 2005
The council appealed against the finding that the complainant’s premises occupied under a tenancy of the council, constituted a statutory nuisance which they had a duty to abate. The claimant’s son was disabled and his condition involved behavioural problems. She said that the kitchen was, in view of his condition too small and dangerous in … Continue reading Cunningham v Birmingham City Council: Admn 6 May 1997
The council tenant plaintiff alleged a statutory nuisance against the council in the form of condensation, damp and mould in his flat. When it came to the hearing the damp had abated. The magistrates asked whether it was likely to recur. The council replied that they had offered to install heaters in the property which … Continue reading Carr v Hackney London Borough Council: QBD 9 Mar 1995
The parties disputed discharges from a sewer outfall into the Stourbridge canal which had been constructed by a regional water authority in about 1976, under the previous statutory regime. The relevant outfall was therefore already in use at the transfer date pursuant to a right enjoyed by the regional water authorities under the Public Health … Continue reading British Waterways Board v Severn Trent Water Ltd: CA 23 Mar 2001
Citations: (1970) 69 LGR 103 Statutes: Public Health Act 1936, Noise Abatement Act 1960 Cited by: Cited – Manley and Another v New Forest District Council Admn 6-Nov-2007 The defendants appealed by way of case stated against their convictions for noise nuisance for their husky kennels – ‘Howling Dog Kennels’. They said that it was … Continue reading Saddleworth Urban District Council v Aggregate and Sand Ltd: 1970
An action was brought for for negligence and/or breach of statutory duty under the 1936 Act. The plaintiff alleged that Melford Rural District Council (‘Melford’: the Defendant Council’s predecessor) had failed to inspect with reasonable care the foundations of the house that he was building. However, by the time the plaintiff noticed the defects, Melford … Continue reading Walters v Babergh District Council: 1983
The defendant sought legal aid to defend an action to abate a statutory nuisance under the 1936 Act. Held: Such an action was criminal in nature. The action had been brought under section 99, but the imposition of a penalty under s94 was a criminal sentence. ‘On analysis, the position seem to be that proceedings … Continue reading Regina v Inner London Crown Court ex parte Bentham: QBD 1989
It was argued that proceedings brought under s94 by information not complaint were a nullity. Held: The argument failed. A failure to comply with an abatement notice was a criminal offence, but proceedings could also be brought by complaint under s99 Citations: [1972] 1 All ER 260, [1972] 1 WLR 203 Statutes: Public Health Act … Continue reading Northern Ireland Trailers Ltd v Preston County Borough: 1972
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either regularly or from time to time, as overnight accommodation, and several larger tents … Continue reading City of London v Samede and Others: QBD 18 Jan 2012
The court was asked whether a culvert under a railway carried a sewer or a watercourse. It appeared that the construction of the railway had interrupted natural watercourses which drained a large catchment area, and the culvert was to carry the water away despite the obstacle created by the railway embankment. If it was a … Continue reading British Railways Board v Tonbridge and Malling District Council: CA 1981
An offence arose under the 1936 Act when a complaint was brought by an aggrieved person. A person was entitled to make a complaint under section 94 without first serving an abatement notice. Judges: Lord Griffiths Citations: [1990] 3 All ER 385, [1990] 1 WLR 1350 Statutes: Public Health Act 1936 94 Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council v Bujok: HL 1990
The court was asked whether a vendor of property had satisfied an obligation to provide the purchaser with the right to run foul and surface water from the land sold to a public sewer. The vendor contended that this obligation was satisfied by the right of the purchaser to connect a 12 inch diameter pipe … Continue reading Beech Properties v GE Wallis and Sons Ltd: 1977
Complaint was made as to the failure to repair a property, and the duty to abate the resulting nuisance. Watkins J said: ‘Speaking for myself I would adopt the words of Lord Wilberforce so as to state that a nuisance cannot arise if what has taken place affects only the person or persons occupying the … Continue reading National Coal Board v Thorne: 2 Jan 1976
On the wording of section 94(2), the relevant date for determining whether the alleged nuisance exists is the date of the hearing before the magistrates. Accordingly, if it has by that time been abated, no offence is committed. Citations: [1981] 1 WLR 1325 Statutes: Public Health Act 1936 94(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: … Continue reading Coventry City Council v Doyle: QBD 1981
cw Public Health – Nuisance – Complaint by tenant – Local authority’s compulsory acquisition of house in clearance area – Local authority postponing demolition as house capable of providing accommodation of standard adequate for time being – House statutory nuisance – whether nuisance order appropriateThe local authority compulsorily acquired a house in a clearance area … Continue reading Salford City Council v McNally: QBD 19 Dec 1974
The House considered the interaction of the 1936 and 1957 Acts as to the distinction between the questions of injury to health and fitness for human habitation: ‘It was not a defence to establish that the house, the subject of the complaint, was occupied by reason of section 48 of the Housing Act 1957 and … Continue reading Salford City Council v McNally: HL 1976
An abatement order had been made against the council under the 1936 Act. The tenant appealed a finding that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to award compensation under the 1973 Act. Held: An order under the 1973 Act required a criminal conviction. Section 94 of the 1936 Act created an offence of which the … Continue reading Herbert v Lambeth London Borough Council: QBD 27 Nov 1991
Savile J: ‘I am not persuaded that because there is now the Control of Pollution Act and there was previously the Noise Abatement Act that therefore lends any support to the construction [that the Public Health Act 1936 did not apply to premises whose standard of noise insulation was such as make the premises prejudicial … Continue reading London Borough of Southwark v Ince: QBD 1989
The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority appealed a finding that it was liable, arguing that the claims were time barred and that it had … Continue reading Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council: HL 12 May 1977
The question was whether the premises in question were in such a state as to be prejudicial to health, being injurious, or likely to cause injury, to health. The defects included dampness. Evidence was given by a self-employed public health advisor, who had previously been a senior public health inspector. He had inspected the premises … Continue reading Patel v Mehtab: QBD 1980
It was not necessary first to serve an abatement notice before commencing proceedings for statutory nuisance under s99. ‘. . . It is surely repugnant to common sense that in the area of legal activity a local authority should be prosecuted by one of its tenants without first being given opportunity to remedy the consequences … Continue reading Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council v Bujok: CA 1989
Overloading caused the corporation’s foul sewer to erupt through a manhole and discharge ‘deleterious and malodorous matter’ into Mr Smeaton’s garden. Held: The authority were not liable for the connections with the sewer and discharge of their sewage into it. The court denied the possibility of pursuing a claim for damages in nuisance where there … Continue reading Smeaton v Ilford Corporation: ChD 1954
The complainant made a series of requests to the London Borough of Merton (the Council) for information relating to visits by an Environmental Health Officer to a property which was under the complainant’s control and management and which had been the subject of a series of prosecutions under the Housing Act 2004, the Prevention of … Continue reading Merton London Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 16 Jul 2013
The court was asked: ‘whether a sewerage undertaker under the Water Industry Act 1991 has a statutory right to discharge surface water and treated effluent into private watercourses such as the Respondents’ canals without the consent of their owners.’ Held: The appeals of the sewerage company succeeded. Such discharges were in their nature a trespass, … Continue reading The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd and Another v United Utilities Water Plc: SC 2 Jul 2014
References: [1976] 1 WLR 543 Coram: Watkins J Complaint was made as to the failure to repair a property, and the duty to abate the resulting nuisance. Watkins J said: ‘Speaking for myself I would adopt the words of Lord Wilberforce so as to state that a nuisance cannot arise if what has taken place … Continue reading National Coal Board v Thorne; 2 Jan 1976
The claimants sought to have registered as a town or village green land in Whitby which had been provided as a playing field by the Local Authority since 1934. The inspector had found that the use had not been ‘as of right’ as required by the 2006 Act. The field, which he said: ‘has all … Continue reading Barkas, Regina (on The Application of) v North Yorkshire County Council and Scarborough Council: Admn 20 Dec 2011
The question was whether the council held land as open space, either under the Public Health Act 1875 or under the Open Spaces Act 1908. The title deeds under which the council acquired the land in 1936 did not state the purpose for which it had been acquired. The council relied on a subsequent deed … Continue reading Malpass, Regina (on The Application of) v The County Council of Durham: Admn 25 Jul 2012
The claimant had been involved in a monthly cycle ride through central London which had continued for many years. The ride took place without any central organisation and without any route being pre-planned. They objected to being required to apply for a licence and to file a route with the Commissioner under section 11. The … Continue reading Kay v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis: HL 26 Nov 2008
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject matters were reserved to the UK Parliament under the 1998 Act. Second that the Act … Continue reading Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate: SC 12 Dec 2012
When considering if premises fell within the section, and were ‘in such a state as to be prejudicial to health’, the court must consider some feature of the premises which was in itself prejudicial. An arrangement of rooms which was unsatisfactory and might be considered insanitary did not fall within the provision. The risk of … Continue reading Birmingham City Council v Oakley: HL 29 Nov 2000
The Court was asked as to the registration of a playing field as a ‘town or village green’. Local residents asserted that their use of the land, having been ‘as of right’ required the registration. They now appealed against rejection of that argument. Held: The basic issues was ‘where land is provided and maintained by … Continue reading Barkas, Regina (on The Application of ) v North Yorkshire County Council and Another: SC 6 Mar 2014
The appellants had audited the books of the respondent company, but had failed to identify substantial frauds by an employee of the respondent. The auditors appealed a finding of professional negligence, relying on the maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio. Held: (Mance and Scott LL dissenting) The appeal succeeded. The company could not bring … Continue reading Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation): HL 30 Jul 2009
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers. Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The risk of injury arose, not from any danger due to the … Continue reading Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others: HL 31 Jul 2003
The Court was asked whether interest payable under rule 14.23(7) of the Insolvency Rules 2016 is ‘yearly interest’ within the meaning of section 874 of the Income Tax Act 2007. If so, the administrators must deduct income tax before paying interest to creditors. Lehmann Brothers had become insolvent, but in the administration a substantial surplus … Continue reading Revenue and Customs v Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe): SC 13 Mar 2019
The defendant had constructed a reservoir to supply water to his mill. Water escaped into nearby disused mineshafts, and in turn flooded the plaintiff’s mine. The defendant appealed a finding that he was liable in damages. Held: The defendant was bound ‘sic uit suo ut non laedat alienum’. ‘The defendants, treating them as the owners … Continue reading Rylands v Fletcher: HL 1868
Article 35-1 Exhaustion of domestic remedies Effective domestic remedy Constitutional complaint on retroactivity of criminal provision on genocide: inadmissible Facts – The applicants were former officials of the then Soviet Socialist Republic of Latvia. In 2003, pursuant to a provision inserted into the Latvian Criminal Code in 1993, they were convicted of crimes contrary to … Continue reading Larionovs And Tess v Latvia (Dec): ECHR 25 Nov 2014
Land-owner’s Possible Duty to Trespassers The plaintiff, a child had gone through a fence onto the railway line, and been badly injured. The Board knew of the broken fence, but argued that they owed no duty to a trespasser. Held: Whilst a land-owner owes no general duty of care to a trespasser, the creation by … Continue reading British Railways Board v Herrington: HL 16 Feb 1972
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. In OBG, the defendants acted as receivers under an invalid charge, and were accused of unlawful interference … Continue reading Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar: HL 2 May 2007
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate. Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at the scene of which Superintendent McMillan was present on the day … Continue reading Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: Admn 6 Nov 2019
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit her enjoyment of her land. Held: The interference with TV reception by an … Continue reading Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997
Appropriation was not in sufficient form The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed. Held: The appeal failed. The use of the … Continue reading Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
The claimant rights holders sought an order to require the defendant broadband internet provider to deny access to its users to websites which were said to facilitate the distribution of infringing copies of their films. An earlier judgment had . .
The defendants appealed their convictions for being members of proscribed organisations. They were members of the ‘Real IRA’, but only the IRA was actually proscribed.
Held: The appeals failed. In construing an Act of Parliament it may be of . .
