There had been a prosecution for wilfully preventing and interrupting the free passage of persons in a public street. There had been a procession with a band playing.
Held: It was a question of fact and degree whether such a use of the street was reasonable. Gibson J said: ‘No body of men has a right to appropriate the highway and exclude other citizens from using it. The question whether user is reasonable or not is a question of fact to be determined by common sense with regard to ordinary experience ‘.
A procession is prima facie legal, differing from ‘the collection of a stationary crowd’ but a procession may become a nuisance if the right is exercised unreasonably or with reckless disregard of the rights of others. Any unreasonable or excessive use of a highway or activity on or near the highway which renders the highway less commodious to the public is enough to constitute a nuisance.
Judges:
Gibson J
Citations:
[1903] 2 IR 82
Cited by:
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Nuisance
Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.192197
