Hirose Electrical UK Ltd v Peak Ingredients Ltd [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2011Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2011] EWCA Civ 987, 11 August 2011. Sheds light on when odours emanating from a property legally constitute a nuisance for neighbours and the importance of a property's locality in determining whether its odours are a nuisance. Appellant H, a mobile phone manufacture, leased an industrial unit adjacent to respondent P, a food additives producer: the units being only separated by a porous breeze-block party wall. H contended that smells wafting from P's premises constituted a nuisance to its employees and premises. "Held": Appeal dismissed. P's odours did not constitute a nuisance. The decision took into account the industrial estate's character.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 154582-2001 |
[2011] EWCA Civ 987, 11 August 2011. Sheds light on when odours emanating from a property legally constitute a nuisance for neighbours and the importance of a property's locality in determining whether its odours are a nuisance. Appellant H, a mobile phone manufacture, leased an industrial unit adjacent to respondent P, a food additives producer: the units being only separated by a porous breeze-block party wall. H contended that smells wafting from P's premises constituted a nuisance to its employees and premises. "Held": Appeal dismissed. P's odours did not constitute a nuisance. The decision took into account the industrial estate's character.