header-logo header-logo

01 August 2014
Issue: 7617 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Nuisance

Coventry and others v Lawrence and another (No 2) [2014] UKSC 46, [2014] All ER (D) 226 (Jul)

In respect of the specific issue of landlords’ liability for their tenant’s nuisance, it was not enough for them to be aware of the nuisance and take no steps to prevent it. In order to be liable for authorising a nuisance, the landlords should “either participate directly in the commission of the nuisance, or they must be taken to have authorised it by letting the property”. Further, in considering whether landlords had authorised a nuisance by letting a property from which the tenant had caused the nuisance, the authorities suggested that there had to be a “virtual certainty”, or “a very high degree of probability”, that a letting would result in a nuisance before the landlords could be held liable for the nuisance. Authority to conduct a business was not an authority to conduct it so as to create a nuisance, unless the business could not be conducted without a nuisance. Where landlords were being held liable for their tenant’s

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll