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

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott strengthens social housing development offering with senior London appointment

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers strengthens Birmingham real estate team with partner hire

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan expands private client and regulatory teams with new legal directors

NEWS
A mood of cautious optimism has enveloped the criminal law sector following indications the Prime Minister may abandon planned jury reforms
Helping to source the services and providers you need
The Senior Courts Costs Office has clarified that judges conducting detailed assessment proceedings cannot order security for costs—a ruling that may leave successful parties exposed to further litigation expense
Rejecting a generous settlement can prove an expensive mistake, as two recent high-profile cases demonstrate
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) continues to show that failing to disclose regulatory issues can attract harsher consequences than the original misconduct itself
back-to-top-scroll