Southwark LBC v Mills [1999] 4 All ER 449
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:04:28 UTC
Plaintiff sued their landlord, Defendant, for having failed to provide effective insulation against the day-to-day noises of their neighbours (whose noise was no more than ordinary and reasonable).
CA rejected their claims.
Lord Hoffmann
It held that that the ordinary and reasonable use of residential premises by its occupier was not in itself an actionable nuisance and therefore, where the noise was ordinary and reasonable (i.e. not a nuisance), a landlord couldn’t be liable for having authorised it.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Coventry v Lawrence (No 2)
The claim made by the respondents against the landlords for nuisance is rejected since the landlords did not endorse or engage in the nuisance. For liability in a nuisance case, the landlords must ei...
Laws v Florinplace
Defendants opened a sex shop with signs and Plaintiffs (residents of local area) claimed actionable nuisance due to their offence at the shop being present. Court allowed Plaintiff’s claim. Held that...
Kennaway v Thompson
Plaintiff had built himself a house by a lake and Defendant started organising water skiing, etc., causing noise that made life intolerable for Plaintiff. CA granted an injunction to limit the activi...
Hunter v Canary Wharf
Private nuisances are of three kinds. They are: Nuisance by encroachment on a neighbour's land; Nuisance by direct physical injury to a neighbour's land; and Nuisance by interference with a neighbour...
Andrews v Schooling
Defendant had renovated a house which suffered leaks due to inadequate work having been done in the basement which Plaintiff (tenant) argued was a breach of the 1972 Act. CA allowed her claim, statin...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.