Plaintiff was breeding foxes and put up a sign advertising the fact. Defendant, who was trying to sell the neighbouring space, thought that this would deter buyers.
Therefore when Plaintiff refused to take down his sign, Defendant fired guns along the boundary which, as he knew, causes foxes to avoid mating and kill their young.
Court awarded Plaintiff damages and granted an injunction.
Declined to follow Bradford Corporation v Pickles, saying that cases of noise were distinct from cases of percolating water and that in noise cases like this, Christie rules apply so that there was actionable nuisance.
Ask questions ๐ Get answers ๐ It's simple ๐๏ธ๐๐๏ธ
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedThese product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
Tort Law | Nuisance Notes (70 pages) |
Tort Law | Nuisance Notes (10 pages) |