levo

Tort: Torts Connected to Land

Public nuisance and the class of persons affected

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

Attorney-General v PYA Quarries and what makes a group a class of the public, the special damage a private claimant must show, and the kinds of conduct the tort catches.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Numbers

Define public nuisance.

Key term

What were the facts of Attorney-General v PYA Quarries Ltd [1957]?

Key term

What is a class of persons for the purposes of public nuisance?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    Define public nuisance.

    Model answer

    Attorney-General v PYA Quarries Ltd [1957] supplied the modern definition of public nuisance. A public nuisance materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of a class of the public. The wrong is done to the public rather than to one landowner.

  2. 2

    What were the facts of Attorney-General v PYA Quarries Ltd [1957]?

    Model answer

    Quarry blasting threw dust, stones and vibration over a nearby neighbourhood. The Court of Appeal held the operation to be a public nuisance affecting a class of people.

  3. 3

    What is a class of persons for the purposes of public nuisance?

    Model answer

    A class of persons is a section of the public large enough that the community at large should take responsibility. The sufficiency of the number is a question of fact in each case.

  4. 4

    Does every member of the class have to be affected?

    Model answer

    A representative cross-section of the class must be affected rather than every individual. A nuisance troubling a whole street satisfies the requirement.

  5. 5

    Give examples of conduct amounting to public nuisance.

    Model answer

    Obstructing the highway, polluting a river and holding a noisy all-night event have all been held to be public nuisances. Each affects the public generally rather than one occupier.

  6. 6

    What did R v Rimmington and R v Goldstein [2005] decide?

    Model answer

    The House of Lords held that a public nuisance must cause common injury to a section of the public. A collection of separate injuries to individuals is not enough.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Tort: Torts Connected to Land, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.