According to Bamford v Turnley, private nuisance refers to ‘any continuous activity or state of affairs causing a substantial and unreasonable interference with a claimant's land or his use or enjoyment of that land’.
View More >>A tort is regarded as an act or rather, an omission, aside from a breach of a contract that results into an injury or harm imposed on another.
View More >>English law does not recognise any liability in tort for omission of a person to help another in a difficulty.
View More >>This is an application by the Claimant (C) for the interim injunction which is prohibitory in nature of an issue claimed for an act of private nuisance by the Defendant ( D ).
View More >>The final stage of the three-stage test for duty of care in the tort of negligence as set out in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] UKHL 2 is whether the imposition of a duty of care is fair, just and reasonable. This allows the court to consider
View More >>Different forms of tort liability arise subject to the circumstances surrounding an incident. This applies to occupier’s liability. An occupier is a person or an entity that exercises sufficient control over the concerned premises. As such, they owe a duty of care towards any person,
View More >>The law of tort keeps a distinguished law with respect to shift of liability when an individual is held obligated
View More >>The issue in this case is whether Bruce has a claim in negligence against Cracking Pastry Ltd for his gastro-enteritis
View More >>The general rule is that a party is liable to another only when they have acted, or omitted to act, in a way which is in breach of his duty of care. However, vicarious liability and non-delegable duties are exceptions to this rule
View More >>The concept of vicarious liability arises to allow the shift of liability in case when an individual performs a wrongful act in breach of a duty or any negligent act that gives rise to a misdeed. Especially in the context of an employer and employee relationship
View More >>Ward V. Tesco is one of the most important cases in the English law of tort for the purpose of setting precedent. Colloquially known as the “trip and slip” case, the case instituted by Ms.
View More >>The tortuous definition of negligence gives us ample grounds and provisions to work on and this wrong in civil nature covers extensively large scopes before the courts of the UK herein.
View More >>This essay discusses the proposition that the English and Welsh tort law lacks coherence, but that it can and ought to be reformed in ways that would make it more coherent. Apart from discussing the reasons why tort law is considered to be
View More >>Public nuisance affects a substantial number of people, unlike private nuisance which is limited to private parties. In other words, the principle difference between public and private nuisance is that the former is an act that is affecting the public at large while the latter is an act affecting particular individual or individuals.
View More >>There are certain torts that specifically protect interests in land. Negligence protects interests in land against damage or loss caused by carelessness. The tort of nuisance protects interests in land against interference with the rights to enjoy the land by the person who has proprietary interests in the land.
View More >>This essay will discuss the elements of liability for damage caused by a defective product in the tort of negligence and under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (the CPA). It will compare and contrast the elements and determine the extent of protection provided by the two sets of law.
View More >>This essay will describe the interrelation between the law of tort and the law of contract arising out of claim from breach of contractual and civil duties. Liabilities in contract and in tort arise from
View More >>The definition of negligence given by Baron Alderson in the case of Blythe reflects that the standard of care of a reasonable man determines whether there has been a breach of duty or not. According to Alderson, negligence may either be an omission or act that would not have been
View More >>The most dominating form of legal system functioning in Europe is the common law system, which is also followed in England and Wales. The common law system is basically the reliance on the binding judgments forwarded by the judges which acts as precedents for future cases which is different from the civil law system. In the English legal system,
View More >>In the recent Supreme Court decision of Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc, Lord Toulson stated that in order to apply the close connection test, the court has to consider the “field of activities” entrusted to the employee, and the existence of a sufficient connection
View More >>The two parties namely Zaherah and Brian are two neighbors living right beside one another. The conflict in question is about an unresolved issue regarding the parking spaces in front of their houses. The conflict took a bigger shape when Zaherah returned
View More >>An ideological rift between the two victorious protagonists and also functioned within states for that matter. The two protagonists being the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had conflicted ideologies along in the lines of political, military
View More >>This essay responds to the legal issues raised in the scenario presented. The essay examines the principles of negligence and applies the legal principles to the issues in the scenario including final legal advice to Peter. The issue in this case is whether
View More >>Aristotle said in The Politics that there “are three elements in each constitution …first, the deliberative, which discusses everything of common importance; second the officials; and third, the judicial element." Thus, in a discussion on the British constitution
View More >>There are three issues in this situation concerning recovery of economic loss for negligent misstatement. First, whether Siam is liable for negligent misstatement regarding investment in Global Bubble Company. Second, whether
View More >>A breach of duty is determined by the standard of care of the “reasonable man”. This is reflected in the definition given by Baron Alderson in the case of Blythe v Birmingham Waterworks (1856). According to him, negligence involves either an omission to act, which would not have been otherwise committed if the defendant would have acted like a reasonable and prudent man in ordinary conduct of human affairs, or an act which the reasonable and prudent man would not have done. However, this definition may create problems in defining who the reasonable and prudent man is. Determination of the definition seems subjective as was observed by Lord Macmillan in Glasgow Corporation v Muir (HL 1943).
View More >>The issue in this case is whether Murad is entitled to claim damages for negligence as a result of falling in Hattie’s property. The law which is applicable to this issue is contained in the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, Occupiers Liability Act 1984, as well as common law principles related to negligence.
View More >>The Supreme Court has been approached to pronounce itself on the instant case involving the above named Appellants and Respondents respectively in a series of tortious claims. The Appellants, in a case filed at the High court, had successfully argued their case. At the Court of Appeal, the Respondents also argued their appeal, which eventually overturned the High Court’s decision.
View More >>Tort law has developed overtime to remedy situations that other branches of law seem silent on. Negligence generally involves failure to do that which ought to have been done. For negligence to be established, a duty must exist, which duty must be breached by one person and normally the result is undesired. There are three issues that must be satisfied for negligence to stand out: one must first owe the other a duty, normally a duty to care.
View More >>Private nuisance is defined as the unlawful interference with the use and enjoyment of land.The question that this essay critically explores is whether the law of private nuisance strikes an adequate balance between the rights of the land owner and his neighbour. The question of balance between these parties is relevant because the tort of private nuisance protects a neighbouring landowner’s interest of enjoyment of his own property free from interference by the activities of the neighbour, thereby requiring a limitation on the neighbour’s right to use his property in the way that he thinks fit.
View More >>Take a deeper dive into Television Program Examples with our additional resources.