header-logo header-logo

Winners & losers

20 March 2015 / Andrew Butler
Issue: 7645 / Categories: Features , Public , In Court
printer mail-detail
nlj_7645_andrew-butler

Andrew Butler assesses the impact of Lawrence —one year on

A year after the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Lawrence & another v Fen Tigers Ltd and others [2014] AC 822, [2014] UKSC 13 how have the radical changes foreshadowed by that case played out?

The decision in Lawrence

To recap— Lawrence was a case in which the claimant householders brought an action in nuisance against various entities involved in the management of a motocross track in their Suffolk locality. The judge at first instance held that the activities constituted a nuisance and granted an injunction. The Court of Appeal overturned that decision, holding that the judge had gone wrong by assessing the character of the area without having regard to the offending activity. The Supreme Court disagreed with the Court of Appeal and reinstated the decision of the judge.

Why is Lawrence important?

Lawrence gave rise to a number of important questions, including:

  • whether there could be a prescriptive right to cause a nuisance;
  • whether and to what extent
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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Solicitors are installing panic buttons and thumb print scanners due to ‘systemic and rising’ intimidation including death and arson threats from clients
Ministers’ decision to scrap plans for their Labour manifesto pledge of day one protection from unfair dismissal was entirely predictable, employment lawyers have said
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll