Nuisance — Public and Private — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. In St Helens Smelting Co. v. Tipping (1865), the House of Lords held that the character of the neighbourhood is irrelevant when:

   • The complaint is only of personal discomfort
   • The nuisance causes actual material damage to property (correct answer)
   • The defendant is a private individual
   • The claimant lives far from the industrial area

   Explanation. Where a nuisance causes actual material property damage, locality is irrelevant; liability follows regardless of how industrial the area is. Locality matters more for mere personal discomfort claims.

2. What must a claimant show to succeed in private nuisance?

   • Any interference at all with their land, however trivial
   • An unlawful, substantial, and unreasonable interference with their use or enjoyment of land (correct answer)
   • That the defendant physically entered their land
   • That the defendant intended to cause harm

   Explanation. Private nuisance requires a substantial and unreasonable interference. The court looks at duration, frequency, intensity, time of day, locality and the defendant's motive. That the activity is useful to the public is no defence (Bamford v. Turnley).

3. According to Attorney-General v. PYA Quarries Ltd. (1957), whether an affected group counts as "the public" for public nuisance is:

   • Fixed at a specific numerical threshold set by statute
   • A question of fact and degree in each case (correct answer)
   • Irrelevant to establishing public nuisance
   • Always limited to an entire town or city

   Explanation. The court held this is a question of fact and degree in each case, not a fixed numerical threshold.

4. For an individual to sue in tort for public nuisance, they must generally show:

   • Nothing beyond being a member of the public
   • Special damage, over and above what the general public suffered (correct answer)
   • That they are a government official
   • That the nuisance lasted at least one year

   Explanation. Since public nuisance is primarily a crime, an individual can only sue in tort if they suffered special damage differing in kind or degree from the general public.

5. An occupier with an unusually sensitive use of their land, such as storing especially delicate goods, can:

   • Demand a higher standard of care than an ordinary occupier would need
   • Not demand a standard of care greater than what an ordinary occupier would require (correct answer)
   • Never bring a nuisance claim at all
   • Automatically win any nuisance claim regardless of the facts

   Explanation. Nuisance is judged against normal sensitivity, not the claimant's own heightened vulnerability — an unusually sensitive use does not raise the standard owed.