Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A person is guilty of a public nuisance (also known as common nuisance), who (a) does an act not warranted by law, or (b) omits to discharge a legal duty, if the effect of the act or omission is to endanger the life, health, property, morals, or comfort of the public, or to obstruct the public in the exercise or enjoyment of rights common to ...
Rylands v Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330 is a leading decision by the House of Lords which established a new area of English tort law.It established the rule that one's non-natural use of their land, which leads to another's land being damaged as a result of dangerous things emanating from the land, is strictly liable.
Nuisance in English law is an area of tort law broadly divided into two torts; private nuisance, where the actions of the defendant are "causing a substantial and unreasonable interference with a [claimant]'s land or his/her use or enjoyment of that land", [1] and public nuisance, where the defendant's actions "materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of life of a class of His ...
For example, the sound of a crying baby may be annoying, but it is an expected part of quiet enjoyment of property and does not constitute a nuisance. [ citation needed ] Nuisance distinguishes between cases where the conduct alleged to be a nuisance has caused material injury to property and the cases where it has caused “sensible personal ...
Malicious mischief is an offence against the common law of Scotland.It does not require actual damage to property for the offence to be committed; financial damage consequential to the act is sufficient, unlike vandalism which requires actual damage to property to form the offence, the latter being defined by section 52 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995.
In the context of property law it can be restated as: "In a property dispute (whether real or personal), in the absence of clear and compelling testimony or documentation to the contrary, the person in actual, custodial possession of the property is presumed to be the rightful owner. The rightful owner shall have their possession returned to ...
City and Westminster Properties (1934) Ltd v Mudd [1959] Ch 129 is an English contract law case, regarding the parol evidence rule. It illustrates one of the large exceptions, that a written document is not deemed to be exhaustive of the parties' intentions when there is clear evidence of a collateral contract.
[2] The case established that the rights of a land owner over his land extend only to a height necessary for the ordinary use and enjoyment of his land. Ordinary commercial and private flights would, in any event, have been protected from actions in trespass by section 40(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1949 (now Civil Aviation Act 1982 , section ...