Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, andquot;to hurtandquot;) is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also andquot;commonandquot;) or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, andquot;an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjectsandquot;.Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Class 12 Exam > Class 12 Questions > Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. n...

Join the Discussion on the App

Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesn't include visitors or those who aren't considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.

The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns 'escapes onto land', and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a person's enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.

Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.

Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?

a)
Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.
b)
Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.
c)
No, Television signals are not property.
d)
No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Languages: Mock Test - 9

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from L...

Correct Answer is (b)

Principle of law is to the effect that a person who has no interest in property nor any right of occupation in the proper sense of the term, can maintain an action for a nuisance. Only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance. Therefore, the claimant's claim had no cause of action at all.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam

Similar Class 12 Doubts

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. A large tower was constructed in the Docklands area of East London which goes by the name of One Canada Square. Residents in the area experienced interference with the television signals due to the construction of One Canada Square. Some of the claimants were homeowners whilst others were family members, lodgers and others without a proprietary interest in the property affected. Decide, whether interference with ones television reception amounted to actionable nuisance?

View answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property right in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Suterpech was the owner of a large country house with over a thousand acres of land. This land was close to a copper smelting factory which had long been in operation. The smelting factory discharged noxious gases as a result of its operation, which were considered to be a normal part of the smelting operation. As a result, trees on the claimants land were damaged by the fumes and noxious gases.The Suterpech sued for nuisance. Whether the Factory was liable for causing Nuisance?

View answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Murugan incorporated a company named Murugan Metal Mart (MMM). MMM generates a great amount of metal waste during the course of repairing and maintenance of plant and machinery. MMM dumps the metal waste in a nearby place assuming nobody will notice. Dumping however backfires sometimes.For example once MMM tried dumping the waste on the road adjacent to the business premise it ended up blocking it partly causing difficulty to vehicle users and passersby. Can the road users in general sue MMM for the private nuisance?

View answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. If MMM is liable then on being sued by sole road user, then the suit will lie under

View answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Ms.Malone lived in a house belonging to her husbands employer. Ms.Malones husband was a tenant, and she had a license to live at the property. Whilst using the lavatory, the toilet cistern was dislodged by vibrations caused by the next-door neighbours electricity generator, which fell on her causing her injuries. She sued her neighbour for nuisance.Decide.

View answer

Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Nuisance (from archaic nocence, through Fr. noisance, nuisance, from Lat. nocere, "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as, "an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all Her Majestys subjects".Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded time. Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (land owners, lease holders etc.) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. However this doesnt include visitors or those who arent considered to have an interest in the land. If a neighbour interferes with that quiet enjoyment, either by creating smells, sounds, pollution or any other hazard that extends past the boundaries of the property, the affected party may make a claim in nuisance.The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear, due to the public/private nuisance divide, and existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy at Lancaster University have popularised the idea that Rylands forms a separate, though related, tort. This is still an issue for debate, and is rejected by others (the primary distinction in Rylands concerns escapes onto land, and so it may be argued that the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.) In summation, Nuisance means an unlawful interference with a persons enjoyment of property. Property rights in the land is necessary for an action in Private nuisance.Private nuisance is an obstruction to the right of private parties. Public nuisance is an obstruction to the right of public in general.Q. Whether it was necessary for the claimant to have a property interest before a claim of nuisance could be launched?a)Yes, Television signals are a kind of intangible property.b)Yes, only claimants with property rights can launch actions for private nuisance.c)No, Television signals are not property.d)No, as in the given facts interference with enjoyments of property is absent.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam