header-logo header-logo

02 May 2014 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7604 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Making a noise

web_francis

The decision in Coventry v Lawrence cannot be ignored, says Andrew Francis

On 26 February 2014 the Supreme Court gave judgment in the case of Coventry v Lawrence [2014] UKSC 13, [2014] All ER (D) 245 (Feb). That was a noise nuisance case. The claimants lived near the defendants’ speedway track in Suffolk. At first instance an injunction was granted on terms that limited the activities on the defendants’ track. On appeal the Court of Appeal said that the proper remedy was damages. The claimants appealed to the Supreme Court.

The decision of the Supreme Court

The judgments of the court are complex and some of them are long. The issues for the Supreme Court were; first, whether it is possible to acquire a prescriptive right to do something which would otherwise be a private nuisance; second, whether it is a defence to a nuisance claim to say that the claimant has “come to the nuisance” (for example by acquiring or occupying property after the nuisance has started); third, how far the defendants’ own activities

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll