2013年长宁区公办幼儿园招生地段表所.ppt

TORTSLECTURE11 NUISANCE WHATISNUISANCE Anunreasonableconductthatmateriallyinterfereswiththeordinarycomfortofhumanexistence Ourmissionfortonight Whatdowedoaboutthewomanacrosstheroadwhodestroyedmy21st THETWO SIDES OFNUISANCE NUISANCE PRIVATE PUBLICNUISANCE PrivateNuisance TheRoadmap Establishment a Unlawfulinterferencewithsomeone sinterestinland b Balanceofrights c IntangibleinterferenceWhocansue a Proprietaryinterest b Familymembers Whocanbesued PersonwhocreatedthenuisanceOthersDefencesRemedies Nuisanceincontext NuisancevNegligenceNuisancevTrespass 1 a Interferencewithland Thesubstantialinterferencewiththeplaintiff suseofhis herlandbytheunreasonableconductofthedefendant HalseyvEssoPetroleum 1961 UnlawfulinterferencewithP sinterestinlandMisfeasance StHelensSmeltingCovTipping 1965 BonicvFieldair 1999 Nonfeasance ThetortprotectsagainstinterferenceswiththeenjoymentoflandMunrovSouthernDairies 1955 1 Establishment interference Inconveniencemateriallyinterferingwiththeordinarycomfortphysicallyofhumanexistence notmerelyaccordingtodaintymodesandhabitsofliving butaccordingtoplainandsoberandsimplenotionsamongtheEnglishpeople KnightBruceVCinWaltervSelfe 1851 1 a PBaerInvestmentsPtyLtdvUniversityofNewSouthWales 2007 NSWLEC128 FactsIssuesWhetherrespondent streesdamagedapplicant ssewerpipes WhethercostofreplacingpipesshouldbeapportionedHeld 1 a O NeillvFrost 2007 NSWLEC400 BC200705292 FactsIssue Whetherremovaloffallentreeshouldbeordered Whethertreewithstructuralconcernsshouldberemoved Held Applicationgrantedinpart 1 a VellavOwnersofStrataPlan8670 2007 NSWLEC365 BC200704853 FactsApplicantappliedforremovaloftreessixyearsafterawareofdamage Issue Whethertreeswarrantedremovalbecausedamagedpavement Whetherdamageshouldbeapportionedbecauseapplicantawareofdamage Held Applicationgrantedinpart 1 a HuntvBedford 2007 NSWLEC130 BC200701745 FactsHeld Applicationdismissed 1 a 1 b TheBalancingofInterests Sicuteretuoutalienumnonlaedas Useyourownthingsoasnottoharmthatofanother Adwellerintownscannotexpecttohaveaspureair asfreefromsmoke smell andnoiseasifhelivedinthecountry anddistantfromotherdwellings andyetanexcessofsmoke smell andnoisemaygiveacauseofaction butineachofsuchcasesitbecomesaquestionofdegree andthequestionisineachcasewhetheritamountstoanuisancewhichwillgivearightofaction LordHalsburyinCollsvHome ColonialStores 1904 MunrovSouthernDairies 1955 HasleyvEssoPetroleum 1961 1 b Establishment balancing GrayvStateofNewSouthWalesMatterNo2391 96 31July1997 Thelawinthissortofcaseistolerablyclear Thelawofnuisance thetortuponwhichtheplaintiffssue isnottoprotectpeople buttoprotectpropertyvalues Thatissobecauseitisanancientremedythathascomedownthroughtheages Thusthemerefactthatoneisdisturbedbynoiseoronegetsirritatedbypryingchildrenorone sprivacyisinvadedisnotsufficienttomakeoutthetortofnuisance Theplaintiffsare however entitlednottohavethevalueoftheirpropertydiminishedbythenoisyactivitiesofthedefendants YoungJ 1 b Ausefultestisperhapswhatisreasonableaccordingtotheordinaryusagesofmankindlivinginsociety ormorecorrectlyinaparticularsociety perLordWrightinSedleigh Denfieldv O Callaghan 1940 AC atp903 GrayvStateofNewSouthWalesMatterNo2391 96 31July1997 1 b 1 b Howdowebalance Unreasonableisbasedonthereasonableperson andwhatordinary giveandtake limitsare Locality MunrovSouthernDairiesTime andduration WherryvKBHutchersonPtyLtd 1987 NSWNatureofactivities Thompson SchwabvCostaki 1956 McKenzievPowley 1916 Availabilityofalternatives CohenvPerth 2000 SeidlervLunaParkReserveTrust 1995 NSWUnreported FactsRollercoasterHours Non SchoolHolidaysFriday 5 30pm 10pmSat 10am 7pmSun 11am 7pmSchoolHolidaysThurs 10am 8pmFri Sat 10am 11pmandSun 11am 7pm Held LUNAPARKCASES SeidlervLunaParkReserveTrust 1995 LunaParkSiteAmendmentNoiseControlAct200519ALegalproceedingsandothernoiseabatementaction 1 Nocriminalproceedings nocivilproceedings whetheratlaworinequity andnonoiseabatementactionmaybetakenagainstanypersonwithrespecttotheemissionofnoisefromtheLunaParksite 2 TheemissionofnoisefromtheLunaParksitedoesnotconstituteapublicorprivatenuisance 3 Thissectiondoesnotapplytoorinrespectofnoisethatexceedsthemaximumpermissiblenoiselevelattheclosestresidentialfacade Street 7orsvLunaParkSydneyPtyLtd 1or 2006 NSWSC230 6April2006 Ps claimD sclaimHeld BreretonJ THENATUREOFD SCONDUCT D sconductmustbeunreasonable Ingeneralact conductwhichisreasonablynecessaryforthenormaluseroflandwouldnotbeconsideredunreasonableMaliciousintentHollywoodSilverfoxFarmLtdvEmmett 2 WHOCANSUE Pmusthaveproprietaryinterestintheaffectedlandtobeabletosue Asulphurouschimneyinaresidentialareaisnotnuisancebecauseitmakeshouseholderscoughandsplutterbutbecauseitpreventsthemtakingtheireaseintheirgardens Itisforthisreasonthattheplaintiffinanactionfornuisancemustshowsometitletorealty Newark TheBoundariesofNuisance 1949 MalonevLaskey 1907 Doesn tincludeP sviewofproperty VictoriaParkRacing RecreationGroundsvTaylor 1937 WhoCanSue TheCases OldhamvLawson 1976 VR654Khorasandjianv Bush 1993 Q B 727 HuntervCanaryWharf IfaP suchasthedaughterinKhorsandjian isharassedbyabusivetelephonecalls thegravamenofthecomplaintliesintheharassmentwhichisjustasmuchanabuse orindeedaninvasionofherprivacy whethersheispesteredinthiswayinhermother shouse oreveninhercarwithamobilephone Intruth whattheCAappearstohavebeendoingwastoexploitthelawofprivatenuisanceinordertocreatebythebackdooratortofharassmentwhichwasonlypartiallyeffectiveinthatitwasartificiallylimitedtoharassmentwhichtakesplaceatherhome Imyselfdonotthinkthisisasatisfactorymannerinwhichtodevelopthelaw especiallywhenthesteptakenwasinconsistentwithanotherdecisionintheCAinMalone LORDGOFF 2 cont ABNORMALPLANTIFFS Forsensitiveusesofland interferencenotunreasonableunlessitwouldhavebeenunreasonabletoordinaryuseofland RobinsonvKilvert 1889 3 WHOMAYBESUED ThecreatorsofthenuisanceFennelvRobsonExcavationsPtyLtd 1977 HargravevGoldman 1963 DeJagervPayneham MagillLodges 1984 CheckingIn PrivateNuisance Establishment a Unlawfulinterferencewithsomeone sinterestinland b Balanceofrights c IntangibleinterferenceWhocansue a Proprietaryinterest b Familymembers Whocanbesued PersonwhocreatedthenuisanceOthersDefencesRemedies YourTurn Steve sownahomeat8WombeyanCt WattleGrove KitandCarlosliveinahouseadjoiningSteve KitandCarlosarereallysecurityconsciousandhaveinstalledfloodlightsandcamerasurveillanceequipment ThefloodlightsandsurveillanceequipmentarepositionedinawaythattheyilluminateSteve sbackyardandmayrecordvideotapeeverythingthatoccursthere Steveuseshisbackyardtohanguphisclothes doinghisgardening andsittingandenjoyinghisradio Hehasbecomedistressedsincetheelectronicgearhasgonein andhenolongerfeelshecanenjoyhisbackyardashedidbefore Thefloodlightsystemisactivatedbyasensor whichswitchesthelightsonwithmovementornoise suchasamovementinSteve sbackyard Whentheequipmentisactivatedthelightscomeonandstayononfor10mins andthecameramaybeactivated Stevecontendsthatheissufferingrealthissuesasaresultofthecontinuedilluminationofhisland PublicNuisance TheRoadmap Establishment a Act omissionwhichmateriallyaffectscollectiverightsofthepublicWhocansue a Thestate b Aplaintiffwhosuffers specialdamage Whocanbesued PersonwhocreatedthenuisanceOthersDefencesRemedies PublicNuisancevPrivateNuisance What sthedifference 1 INTERFERENCE QUEUESOBSTRUCTINGPUBLICHIGHWAYSANDROADS SilservicePtyLtdvSupremeBreadPtyLtdHarpervGNHaden Sons 1933 THEDEGREEOFINTERFERENCE Itisnoteveryinterferencehoweverslightthatconstitutesanactionablenuisance theinterferencemustbesubstantialandmaterialYorkBrosvCommissionerofmainRoads 2 Whocansue Pmaysueinpublicnuisanceonlyifhe shecanestablishspecialdamageaboveandbeyondthatsufferedbyothermembersoftheaffectedpublicWalshvErvin DeepcliffePtyLtdvCityoftheGoldCoast Icannotseethattheappellantsherecanmakeoutacasethattheyweredeniedfreeuninterruptedaccesstotheroadwaybytheconductoftherespondentsinimposingtheparkingrestrictionsinquestion True theparkingrestrictionswereinadjajcentstreets butitcannotbesaidthataccesstoandfromtheroadwaywasdeniedorseriouslyimpaired Asthelearnedtrialjudgeobserved Theshortertimelimitdidnotmateriallyaltertheposition Thefactthatparkingwaslimitedto1hrdurationinportionsoftwostreetsneartherestaurantcouldnotinlawconstituteanactionablenuisanceonhegroundthatpotentialcustomerswerepreventedfromgettingtotherestaurant continuing Itisdifficulttoseehowtheconductinquestionoftherespondentscon