Attorney-General v Corke: ChD 1933

The defendant whose land had been occupied by caravan dwellers for profit was liable in public nuisance and under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher and was restrained by injunction. Offending acts had been committed by the caravan dwellers, who were permitted to occupy the defendant’s land, on other land in the neighbourhood. Bennett J rejected the submission of the defendant’s counsel that: ‘The defendant cannot be made responsible for acts done by the caravan dwellers off the defendant’s property.’
Liability was established under the principle in Rylands v. Fletcher, which: ‘affords in my judgment a basis on which the defendant can be made responsible in law for the nuisance which undoubtedly exists, on the facts, in the vicinity of this camp and which nuisance is caused by some of the people whom he brings there for his own profit’
Bennett J said: ‘The acts which, I think, give rise to a danger to the health of the neighbourhood, are acts done, not on the defendant’s land, but off it by people who live on it’ and
‘The plaintiffs have, however, failed to prove that anything done on the defendant’s land gives rise to a complaint by the neighbours . . All the acts which do interfere with the comfort and convenience of the neighbourhood, and which threaten the health of the neighbourhood, are acts done not on the defendant’s land, but off it, by people whom the defendant brings on to it for his profit’
Bennett J
[1933] Ch 89
England and Wales
CitedRylands v Fletcher CEC 1865
Mr Fletcher’s Lancashire coal mine was flooded by the water from Mr Rylands’ mill reservoir in 1860-61.
Held: Mr Rylands was responsible. Blackburn J said: ‘We think that the true rule of law is, that the person who for his own purposes brings . .

Cited by:
CitedLippiatt and Febry v South Gloucestershire County Council CA 31-Mar-1999
The defendant had failed to remove travellers who had encamped on its land and caused nuisances against neighbouring farmers.
Held: The court refused to strike out a claim in nuisance by neighbouring land owners. It was arguable that a land . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2021; Ref: scu.445031