Define: Nuisance

A nuisance is an unreasonable, unwarranted, or unlawful use of one’s property which interferes with the enjoyment or the use of another person’s property. A nuisance is a civil wrong and does not require an invasion of the land or trespass. Examples of nuisance include foul odours, noxious gases, smoke, dust, loud noises, excessive light, or high temperatures.

A private nuisance is a nuisance which interferes with a private land owner’s rights to enjoy their property or expect a certain level of comfort. A private landowner can bring action against another person for private nuisance if they can prove the offender interfered with their ability to enjoy their land, although the interference must be substantial and unreasonable.

If a plaintiff wishes to win a civil case or file a tort-based on a nuisance they will have to prove the interference was continuous over time and would have constituted a nuisance for a “reasonable person” which will depend on the individual circumstances. Relief for a nuisance is generally an injunctive relief which will require the defendant to start or stop doing a specific action. The plaintiff can ask for both a temporary restraining order until the ruling and if the defendant does not follow the order they may be forced to pay fines or be sent to jail.

Something that interferes with the use of property by being irritating, offensive, obstructive or dangerous. Nuisances include a wide range of conditions, everything from a chemical plant’s noxious odours to a neighbour’s dog barking. The former would be a “public nuisance,” one affecting many people, while the other would be a “private nuisance,” limited to making your life difficult unless the dog was bothering others. Lawsuits may be brought to abate (remove or reduce) a nuisance. See quiet enjoyment, attractive nuisance.

The word nuisance is a word capable of a wide sense; the word means annoyance, or anything that works hurt, inconvenience, or damage, and many include any infringement upon the enjoyment of territorial or personal rights.  If one digs a trench across a public road it is a public nuisance; and if a person falls into it, and is hurt, he may have an action against the wrongdoer.  So if A builds on his own hand so as to darken the ancient lights in his neighbour B’s house, it is a private nuisance.

Legal Definition Of Nuisance

Under the common law, persons in possession of real property (either landowners or tenants) are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lands. 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.

To be a nuisance, the level of interference must rise above the merely aesthetic. For example, if your neighbour paints their house purple, it may offend you, but it does not rise to the level of nuisance. In most cases, normal uses of a property that can constitute quiet enjoyment cannot be restrained in nuisance either. For example, the sound of a crying baby may be annoying, but it is an expected part of quiet enjoyment of property and does not constitute a nuisance.

Nuisances come in two forms: private and public.

A public nuisance is an unreasonable interference with the public’s right to property. It includes conduct that interferes with public health, safety, peace or convenience. The unreasonableness may be evidenced by statute or by the nature of the act, including how long and how bad the effects of the activity may be.

A private nuisance is simply a violation of one’s use of quiet enjoyment of land. It does not include trespass.

Any affected property owner has standing to sue for a private nuisance. If a nuisance is widespread enough, but yet has a public purpose, it is often treated at law as a public nuisance. Owners of interests in real property (whether owners, lessors, or holders of an easement or other interest) have standing only to bring private nuisance suits.

Public Nuisance

A person is guilty of a public nuisance, who does any act, or is guilty of an illegal omission, which causes any common injury, danger, or annoyance to the public, or to the people in general who dwell or occupy a property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger, or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right. A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.

The distinction between a public and private nuisance must be kept in view- the mode of procedure for the abatement of the former being different from that available to an individual with respect to the latter.  To constitute a public nuisance, the thing complained of must be such as in its nature or its consequences is a nuisance an injury or damage to all persons who come within the sphere of its operation, though it may be so in a greater degree to some than it is to other. For example, if during the operation of a manufactory, volumes of noxious smoke or of poisonous effluvia are emitted; to persons who are at all within the reach of these operations, a nuisance, in the popular sense of the term is committed; although to those who are nearer to the manufactory in question the nuisance and inconvenience caused by it may be greater than it is to those who are more remote from it. So, the stopping of the king’s highway is a nuisance to all who may have occasion to travel upon that highway; it may be a much greater nuisance to a person who has to travel along it every day then it is to an individual who has to travel along it only once a year, but it is more or less a nuisance to everyone who has occasion to use it is public nuisance.

History And Legal Development Of Nuisance

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the law of nuisance became difficult to administer as competing property uses often posed a nuisance to each other and the cost of litigation to settle the issue grew prohibitive. As such, most jurisdictions now have a system of land use planning (e.g. zoning) that describes what activities are acceptable in a given location. Zoning generally overrules nuisance. For example, if a factory is operating in an industrial zone, neighbours in the neighbouring residential zone cannot make a claim in nuisance. Jurisdictions without zoning laws, essentially leave land use to be determined by the laws concerning nuisance.

Similarly, modern environmental laws are an adaptation of the doctrine of nuisance to modern complex societies in which a person’s use of his property may harmfully affect another’s property or person far from the nuisance activity and from causes not easily integrated into historic understandings of nuisance law.

Remedies

Under the common law, the only remedy for a nuisance was the payment of damages. However, with the development of the courts of equity, the remedy of an injunction became available to prevent a defendant from repeating the activity that caused the nuisance, and specifying punishment for contempt if the defendant is in breach of such an injunction.

The law and economics movement has been involved in analyzing the most efficient choice of remedies given the circumstances of the nuisance. In Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co. a cement plant interfered with a number of neighbours, yet the cost of complying with a full injunction would have been far more than a fair value of the cost to the plaintiffs of continuation. The New York court allowed the cement plant owner to ‘purchase’ the injunction for a specified amount–the permanent damages. In theory, the permanent damage amount should be the net present value of all future damages suffered by the plaintiff.

Law Related To Nuisance, By Country

UK

The boundaries of the tort are potentially unclear due to the public/private nuisance divide and the existence of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Writers such as John Murphy of the University of Manchester 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 the only difference is the nature of the nuisance, not the nature of the civil wrong.)

Under English law the situation is different: the 1879 case of Sturges v Bridgman is still good law, and a new owner can bring a claim in nuisance for the existing activities of a neighbour.

USA

Many states have limited instances where a claim of nuisance may be brought. Such limitation often became necessary as the sensibilities of urban dwellers were offended by smells of agricultural waste when they moved to rural locations. For example, many states and provinces have “right to farm” provisions that allow any agricultural use of land zoned or historically used for agriculture.

There are two classes of nuisance under the American law: a nuisance in fact or “nuisance per accidens” and a nuisance per se. The classification determines whether the claim goes to the jury or gets decided by the judge. An alleged nuisance, in fact, is an issue of fact to be determined by the jury, who will decide whether the thing or act in question created a nuisance by examining its location and surroundings, the manner of its conduct, and other circumstances. A determination that something is a nuisance in fact also requires proof of the act and its consequences.

By contrast, a nuisance per se is “an activity, or an act, structure, instrument, or occupation which is a nuisance at all times and under any circumstances, regardless of location or surroundings.” Liability for a nuisance per se is absolute and injury to the public is presumed; if its existence is alleged and established by proof, it is also established as a matter of law. Therefore a judge would decide a nuisance per se while a jury would decide a nuisance in fact.

Most nuisance claims allege a nuisance in fact for the simple reason that not many actions or structures have been deemed to be nuisances per se. In general, if an act or use of property is lawful or authorized by competent authority, it cannot be a nuisance per se. Rather, the act in question must either be declared by public statute or by case law to be a nuisance per se. There are not many state or federal statutes or case law declaring actions or structures to be a nuisance in and of themselves. Nor are many activities or structures in and of themselves and under any and all circumstances a nuisance, which is how courts determine whether or not an action or structure is a nuisance per se.

Note: the term is also used less formally in the United States to describe the non-meritorious nature of frivolous litigation. Bob Hamilton of Lakeside Ca owns HxC face. A lawsuit may be described as a “nuisance suit”, and a settlement a “nuisance settlement” if the defendant pays money to the plaintiff to drop the case primarily to spare the cost of litigation, not because the suit would have a significant likelihood of winning.

This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

This glossary post was last updated: 29th March, 2024.