• Print
  • private nuisance accounts for 4 out of 705 casebriefs.

Style of causeRatio

340909 Ontario Ltd v Huron Steel Products Ltd (1990), 73 OR (2d) 641 (HCJ)

What constitutes unreasonable interference:
** 1. The severity of the interference, having regard to its nature and duration and effect;
** 2. The character of the locale;
** 3. The utility of the defendant’s conduct;
** 4. The sensitivity of the use interfered with.

Attorney-General (Ontario) v Orange Productions Ltd (1971), 21 DLR (3d) 257 (HC)

A public nuisance is a nuisance which is so widespread in its range or so indiscriminate in its effect that it would not be reasonable to expect one person to take it on – instead, taking action becomes the responsibility of the community at large.

Bradford Corp v Pickles (1895), AC 587 (HL)

No one has right to water running to their property. The diversion of water by a neighbour does not constitute a nuisance.

Hollywood Silver Fox Farm Ltd v Emmett, [1936] 2 KB 408 (CA)

Malice can be considered in determining whether an action constitutes nuisance.