Nuisance

It was possible to obtain by prescription a right to commit what would otherwise be a nuisance by noise. Where the claimant in nuisance used her property for essentially the same purpose as that for which it had been used by her predecessors since before the alleged nuisance started, the defence of coming to the nuisance had to fail. There was much more room for argument that a claimant who built on, or changed the use of, her property, after the defendant has started the activity alleged to cause a nuisance by noise, or any other emission offensive to the senses, should not have the same rights to complain about that activity as she would have had if her building work or change of use had occurred before the defendant’s activity had started. It was unnecessary to decide the point on the appeal, but it might well be that it could and should normally be resolved by treating any pre-existing activity on