Study Notes

Key Case | Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd (1997) | Nuisance – Interfering with the Use or Enjoyment of the Land

A Level, BTEC Level 3
AQA, Edexcel, OCR, IB, Eduqas, WJEC

For an actionable claim in nuisance it must be proven that the use or enjoyment of the land is interfered with, and not just a recreational activity that takes place on the land.


Claimant: Residents living near Canary Wharf

Defendant: Developers of Canary Wharf

Facts: The residents claimed that the construction of Canary Wharf interfered with their television signal. Steps were taken to rectify the issue but there were two years of interference, a claim was made in nuisance in respect of this time period.

Outcome: Not Liable

Legal principle: A person is entitled to build on their land, more is required than the mere presence of a building stopping something getting to the claimant’s land to form an actionable claim in nuisance. What was interfered with was the television signal, because it was interference with a purely recreational facility, as opposed to interference with the health or physical comfort or well-being of the claimants, it was not an actionable claim.

Boston House,
214 High Street,
Boston Spa,
West Yorkshire,
LS23 6AD

Tel: +44 0844 800 0085

© 2021 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.