An RAF base was set up to practice defence manoeuvres and the claimant said that the noise gave rise to a claim in nuisance and a breach of his article 8 rights. P sought an injunction to stop D from undertaking manoeuvres there. Court awarded P damages but did not grant an injunction. Buckley J said that the public nature of the activities was a defence to otherwise actionable nuisances (provided no more was being done than was absolutely necessary) but that it could NOT be a defence where a claim under the ECHR/HRA might succeed. Although the activity needed to continue in the public interest, P should not have to bear the cost of the public interest and should therefore be given compensation, which would satisfy article 8 compliance requirements.