P had built himself a house by a lake and D started organising water skiing etc, causing noise that made life intolerable for P. CA granted an injunction to limit the activity of speed boat racing to certain times, as a compromise based on the public interest. In cases of continuing actionable nuisances, damages should only be awarded in lieu of injunctions in exceptional cases.
Lawton LJ: The Victorian case of Shelfer says that injunctions should generally be awarded in cases of private nuisance, not damages, and therefore Miller v Jackson was wrongly decided. He says that, of course, we all have to put up with a certain amount of annoyance from our neighbours. The guidelines are: “Intervention by injunction is only justified when the irritating noise causes inconvenience beyond what other occupiers in the neighbourhood can be expected to bear. The question is whether the neighbour is using his property reasonably, having regard to the fact that he has a neighbour.”