header-logo header-logo

Nuisance: a bird in the hand?

12 September 2025 / James Naylor
Issue: 8130 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
229567
James Naylor on aviary unusual case of nuisance


  • In Nicholas v Thomas Upper, the court ruled that noise and visual disturbances from a neighbouring scaffolding business caused stress and breeding failures in falcons, awarding £258,500 in damages.
  • The defendants’ activities were deemed unreasonable and negligent, with personal liability attaching to the director—even without proven malice.
  • The judgment reaffirmed that nuisance includes substantial interference with land enjoyment, including commercial uses, and that abnormal sensitivity isn’t protected unless the defendant’s conduct is extraordinary.

The case of Nicholas and others v Thomas Upper and another company [2025] EWHC 752 (Ch) involved claims of private nuisance and negligence brought by a specialist falcon-breeding business against a neighbouring farm company. The dispute centred on whether the defendants’ conduct constituted an unreasonable interference with the claimants’ use and enjoyment of their land, resulting in significant business losses.

The case is notable for its factual complexity, its application of core nuisance principles, and its engagement with the Supreme Court’s decision in Fearn and others v

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Manchester firm strengthens Court of Protection expertise with partner hire

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Agricultural law team expands with senior director appointments

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
The High Court's decision in Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (Ch) provided a striking reminder of the need to instruct the right expert in retrospective capacity assessments, says Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell in NLJ this week
Paige Coulter of Quinn Emanuel reports on the UK’s first statutory definition of SLAPPs under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023in NLJ this week
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
back-to-top-scroll