header-logo header-logo

Nuisance

01 August 2014
Issue: 7617 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Coventry and others v Lawrence and another (No 2) [2014] UKSC 46, [2014] All ER (D) 226 (Jul)

In respect of the specific issue of landlords’ liability for their tenant’s nuisance, it was not enough for them to be aware of the nuisance and take no steps to prevent it. In order to be liable for authorising a nuisance, the landlords should “either participate directly in the commission of the nuisance, or they must be taken to have authorised it by letting the property”. Further, in considering whether landlords had authorised a nuisance by letting a property from which the tenant had caused the nuisance, the authorities suggested that there had to be a “virtual certainty”, or “a very high degree of probability”, that a letting would result in a nuisance before the landlords could be held liable for the nuisance. Authority to conduct a business was not an authority to conduct it so as to create a nuisance, unless the business could not be conducted without a nuisance. Where landlords were being held liable for their tenant’s

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll