nuisance

• n.

• 妨害、有害

Although diarrhea and constipation may present as mere nuisance symptoms at one extreme, they can be severe or life-threatening at the other.(HIM.246)

　 　

Wikipedia preview

出典(authority):フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』「2019/06/02 21:17:27」(JST)

wiki en

[Wiki en表示]

For the films, see The Nuisance (1921 film) and The Nuisance (1933 film). For the Menswear album, see Nuisance (album). For the statistics parameter, see Nuisance parameter.

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 Majesty's 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 case law. Nuisance signifies that the "right of quiet enjoyment" is being disrupted to such a degree that a tort is being committed.

Definition

Part of the common law series
Tort law
Intentional torts
Assault Battery False imprisonment Intentional infliction of emotional distress Transferred intent
Property torts
Trespass land chattels Conversion Detinue Replevin Trover
Defenses
Assumption of risk Comparative negligence Contributory negligence Consent Necessity Statute of limitations Self-defense Defense of others Defense of property Shopkeeper's privilege
Negligence
Duty of / standard of care Proximate cause Res ipsa loquitur Calculus of negligence Rescue doctrine Duty to rescue Negligent infliction of emotional distress Employment-related Entrustment Malpractice legal medical
Liability torts
Product liability Quasi-tort Ultrahazardous activity
Nuisance
Public nuisance Rylands v Fletcher
Dignitary torts
Defamation Invasion of privacy Intrusion on Seclusion False light Breach of confidence Abuse of process Malicious prosecution Alienation of affections Criminal conversation Seduction Breach of promise
Economic torts
Fraud Tortious interference Conspiracy Restraint of trade
Liability and remedies
Last clear chance Eggshell skull Vicarious liability Volenti non fit injuria Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Neutral reportage Damages Injunction Conflict of tort laws Joint and several liability Comparative responsibility Market share liability
Duty to visitors
Trespassers Licensees Invitees Attractive nuisance
Other common law areas
Contracts Criminal law Evidence Property Wills, trusts, and estates
Law portal

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.

Legally, the term nuisance is traditionally used in three ways:

1. to describe an activity or condition that is harmful or annoying to others (e.g., indecent conduct, a rubbish heap or a smoking chimney)
2. to describe the harm caused by the before-mentioned activity or condition (e.g., loud noises or objectionable odors)
3. to describe a legal liability that arises from the combination of the two. However, the "interference" was not the result of a neighbor stealing land or trespassing on the land. Instead, it arose from activities taking place on another person's land that affected the enjoyment of that land.

The law of nuisance was created to stop such bothersome activities or conduct when they unreasonably interfered either with the rights of other private landowners (i.e., private nuisance) or with the rights of the general public (i.e., public nuisance)

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.

Private nuisance arose out of the action on the case and protects a person’s right to the use and enjoyment of their land. It doesn't include trespass.

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; however, it doesn't 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.Nuisance distinguishes between cases where the conduct alleged to be a nuisance has caused material injury to property and the cases where it has caused “sensible personal discomfort”.

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. According to Oldham v Lawson (where held that the husband has a mere licence and had no title to sue whereas his wife as owner did have title to sue) and some later cases, exclusive possession is necessary to establish a private nuisance case. However, one situation related to transform a private nuisance against land to one against person, this case is no longer considered to be authoritative.

History and legal development

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 can't 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 that 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 neighbors, 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.

Inspector of Nuisances

An Inspector of Nuisances was the title of an office in several English-speaking jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions this term is now archaic, the position and/or term having been replaced by others. In medieval England it was an office of the Courts Leet and later it was also a parochial office concerned with local action against a wide range of 'nuisances' under the common law: obstructions of the highway, polluted wells, adulterated food, smoke, noise, smelly accumulations, eavesdropping, peeping toms, lewd behaviour, and many others. In the United Kingdom from the mid- 19th century this office became associated with solving public health and sanitation problems, with other types of nuisances being dealt with by the local constables.

The first Inspector of Nuisances appointed by a UK local authority Health Committee was Thomas Fresh in Liverpool in 1844. Liverpool later promoted a private Act, the Liverpool Sanatory (sic) Act 1846, that created a statutory post of Inspector of Nuisances. This became the precedent for later local and national legislation. In local authorities that had established a Board of Health under the Public Health Act 1848, or under local Acts implementing the Towns Improvement Clauses Act of 1847, the title was 'Inspector of Nuisances'. The 1855 Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Act and the Metropolis Management Act 1855 (via section 134) mandated such an office but with the title of 'Sanitary Inspector'. So in some places the title was 'Sanitary Inspector' and in others 'Inspector of Nuisances'. Eventually the title was standardized across all UK local authorities as 'Sanitary Inspector'. An Act of Parliament in 1956 changed the title to 'Public Health Inspector'. Similar offices were established across the British Commonwealth and Empire.

The nearest modern equivalent of this position in the UK is the Environmental Health Officer. This title being adopted by local authorities on the recommendation of Central Government after the Local Government Act 1972. Today, Registered UK Environmental Health Officers working in non-enforcement roles (e.g. in the private sector) may prefer to use the generic term 'Environmental Health Practitioner'.

In New South Wales the NSW Public Health Act 1896 gave the NSW Board of Health power to establish 'standards of strength and purity for articles of general consumption', to appoint analysts, and 'to cause to be made such enquiries as it thinks fit in relation to any matters concerning the public health'. Inspectors under the new Act were known as Inspectors of Nuisances, but were later renamed 'sanitary inspectors'.

In the United States, a modern example of an officer with the title 'Inspector of Nuisances' but not the public health role is found in Section 3767[7] of the Ohio Revised Code which defines such a position to investigate nuisances, where this term broadly covers establishments in which lewdness and alcohol are found. Whereas in the United States the environmental health officer role is undertaken by local authority officers with the titles 'Registered Environmental Health Specialist' or 'Registered Sanitarian' depending on the jurisdiction.

Law related to nuisance, by country

United Kingdom

Main article: Nuisance in English law

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.)

Under English law, unlike US law, it is no defence that the claimant "came to the nuisance": 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. In February 2014 the UK Supreme Court ruling in the case of Coventry v Lawrence prompted the launch of a campaign to have the "coming to a nuisance" law overturned. Campaigners hold that established lawful activity continuing with planning permission and local residents' support should be accepted as part of the character of the area by any new residents coming to the locality.

United States

There is perhaps no more impenetrable jungle in the entire law than that which surrounds the word 'nuisance.' It has meant all things to all people, and has been applied indiscriminately to everything from an alarming advertisement to a cockroach baked in a pie. There is general agreement that it is incapable of any exact or comprehensive definition.

Prosser, W. Page; Keeton, W. Page (1984). Prosser and Keeton on Torts (5th ed.). St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing. §§ 86, 616. ISBN 978-0-314-74880-5.

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, which 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 few state or federal statutes or case law declaring actions or structures to be a nuisance in and of themselves. Few activities or structures, in and of themselves and under any and all circumstances, are a nuisance; which is how courts determine whether or not an action or structure is a nuisance per se.

Over the last 1000 years, public nuisance has been used by governmental authorities to stop conduct that was considered quasi-criminal because, although not strictly illegal, it was deemed unreasonable in view of its likelihood to injure someone in the general public. Donald Gifford argues that civil liability has always been an "incidental aspect of public nuisance". Traditionally, actionable conduct involved the blocking of a public roadway, the dumping of sewage into a public river or the blasting of a stereo in a public park. To stop this type of conduct, governments sought injunctions either enjoining the activity that caused the nuisance or requiring the responsible party to abate the nuisance.

In recent decades, however, governments blurred the lines between public and private nuisance causes of action. William Prosser noted this in 1966 and warned courts and scholars against confusing and merging the substantive laws of the two torts. In some states, his warning went unheeded and some courts and legislatures have created vague and ill-defined definitions to describe what constitutes a public nuisance. For example, Florida's Supreme Court has held that a public nuisance is any thing that causes "annoyance to the community or harm to public health."

A contemporary example of a nuisance law in the United States is the Article 40 Bylaw of Amherst, Massachusetts known as the Nuisance House Bylaw. The law is voted on by members of the town at town meetings. The stated purpose of such a law is "In accordance with the Town of Amherst’s Home Rule Authority, and to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town, this bylaw shall permit the Town to impose liability on owners and other responsible persons for the nuisances and harm caused by loud and unruly gatherings on private property and shall discourage the consumption of alcoholic beverages by underage persons at such gatherings."

In practice, the law works so that if one member of the neighborhood feels that there is a neighbor's noise level is annoying or excessively loud, that neighbor is instructed to inform the town police so that they can respond to the location of the noise. "The responding officer has some discretion in how to deal with the noise complaint.... When determining the appropriate response, the officer may take many factors into consideration, such as the severity of the noise, the time of day, whether the residents have been warned before, the cooperation of the residents to address the problem."

The term is also used less formally in the United States to describe the non-meritorious nature of frivolous litigation. 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, rather than because the suit would have a significant likelihood of winning.

Environmental nuisance

In the field of environmental science, there are a number of phenomena which are considered nuisances under the law, including most notably noise, water and light pollution. Moreover there are some issues that are not necessarily legal matters that are termed environmental nuisance; for example, an excess population of insects or other vectors may be termed a "nuisance population" in an ecological sense.

In terms of environmental nuisance litigations, it is hard for someone to be successful in this area due to the standing requirements of private and public nuisance. It is the Court's opinion that legislation should regulate this area.

Particularly, in Australia, all the jurisdictions have such kind of legislation.

From Britannica 1911

A common nuisance is punishable as a misdemeanour at common law, where no special provision is made by statute. In modern times, many of the old common law nuisances have been the subject of legislation. It's no defence for a master or employer that a nuisance is caused by the acts of his servants, if such acts are within the scope of their employment, even though such acts are done without his knowledge, and contrary to his orders. Nor is it a defence that the nuisance has been in existence for a great length of time, for no lapse of time will legitimate a public nuisance.

A private nuisance is an act, or omission, which causes inconvenience or damage to a private person, and is left to be redressed by action. There must be some sensible diminution of these rights affecting the value or convenience of the property. "The real question in all the cases is the question of fact, whether the annoyance is such as materially to interfere with the ordinary comfort of human existence" (Lord Romilly in Crump v. Lambert (1867) L.R. 3 Eq. 409). A private nuisance, differing in this respect from a public nuisance, may be legalized by uninterrupted use for twenty years. It used to be thought that, if a man knew there was a nuisance and went and lived near it, he couldn't recover, because, it was said, it is he that goes to the nuisance, and not the nuisance to him. But this has long ceased to be law, as regards both the remedy by damages, and the remedy by injunction.

The remedy for a public nuisance is by information, indictment, summary procedure or abatement. An information lies in cases of great public importance, such as the obstruction of a navigable river by piers. In some matters, the law allows the party to take the remedy into his own hands, and to "abate" the nuisance. Thus; if a gate be placed across a highway, any person lawfully using the highway may remove the obstruction, provided that no breach of the peace is caused thereby. The remedy for a private nuisance is by injunction, action for damages or abatement. An action lies in every case for a private nuisance; it also lies where the nuisance is public, provided that the plaintiff can prove that he has sustained some special injury. In such a case, the civil is in addition to the criminal remedy. In abating a private nuisance, care must be taken not to do more damage than is necessary for the removal of the nuisance.

In Scotland, there's no recognized distinction between public and private nuisances. The law as to what constitutes a nuisance is substantially the same as in England. A list of statutory nuisances will be found in the Public Health (Scotland) Act 1867, and amending acts. The remedy for nuisance is by interdict, or action.

See also

• Aldred's Case
• Haslem v. Lockwood
• Law
• Neglect
• Public-order crime
• Robinson v Kilvert
• Rylands v. Fletcher
• Tort law
• William L. Prosser

References

Attribution

•  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Nuisance". Encyclopædia Britannica. 19 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

External links

• "Public Nuisance Law": Essays and articles written by legal experts in the subject of public nuisance law.

UpToDate Contents

全文を閲覧するには購読必要です。 To read the full text you will need to subscribe.

• 1. 昆虫咬傷insect bites [show details]
  … The bites of insects may be a minor nuisance or may lead to serious medical problems, including transmission of insect-borne illnesses and severe allergic reactions. Arthropods that commonly bite humans …
• 2. 妊娠中および授乳中のレストレスレッグス症候群restless legs syndrome during pregnancy and lactation [show details]
  …women at some point during the course of their pregnancy. It varies widely in severity, from a minor nuisance in some women to severe, disruptive symptoms in others. Symptoms tend to peak during the third trimester …
• 3. 刺咬昆虫：生物学および識別stinging insects biology and identification [show details]
  …perspiration . They often sting when accidentally pressed. These bees can be an annoying nuisance but are dangerous only to those who are allergic to their venom. Carpenter bees (Apidae) are large…
• 4. メトトレキサートを使用した関節リウマチ治療use of methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis [show details]
  …more rapidly, but there may be a tradeoff with an initial experience of more commonly experienced nuisance toxicities such as stomatitis, nausea, gastrointestinal intolerance, and fatigue. Other alternative …
• 5. 節足動物および昆虫による咬傷の予防：防虫剤およびその他の対策法prevention of arthropod and insect bites repellents and other measures [show details]
  …of disease-carrying arthropods In contrast, milder repellents may be sufficient for preventing nuisance bites in areas with low levels of disease vectors. The phylum Arthropoda includes both insects and…

English Journal

• Effects of brownification and warming on algal blooms, metabolism and higher trophic levels in productive shallow lake mesocosms.

• Feuchtmayr H, Pottinger TG, Moore A, De Ville MM, Caillouet L, Carter HT, Pereira MG, Maberly SC.
• The Science of the total environment. 2019 Aug;678()227-238.
• An increase of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in inland waters has been reported across the northern temperate region but the effects of this on whole lake ecosystems, often combined with other anthropogenic stressors like nutrient inputs and warming, are poorly known. The effects of these changes o
• PMID 31075590

• Cumulative impacts of residential rainwater harvesting on stormwater discharge through a peri-urban drainage network.

• Deitch MJ, Feirer ST.
• Journal of environmental management. 2019 Aug;243()127-136.
• Green infrastructure and techniques such as rainwater harvesting have been proposed as a means to reduce stormwater discharge in developed areas prone to floods. We examined the effects of rainwater harvesting on discharge cumulatively through the Perdido River drainage network in the US state of Fl
• PMID 31096167

• Statistical inference for data-adaptive doubly robust estimators with survival outcomes.

• , D D, I I, I I, h h, .
• Statistics in medicine. 2019 Jul;38(15)2735-2748.
• The consistency of doubly robust estimators relies on the consistent estimation of at least one of two nuisance regression parameters. In moderate-to-large dimensions, the use of flexible data-adaptive regression estimators may aid in achieving this consistency. However, n -consistency of doubly rob
• PMID 30950107

Japanese Journal

• 文学篇 スペクタクル化される狂気 : 『リア王』における「ベドラム乞食」の表象

• 松岡 浩史,マツオカ ヒロシ,Matsuoka Hiroshi
• 文学部論叢 = Kumamoto journal of culture and humanities (110), 31-43, 2019-03
• … While the vagaboned in early modern England were branded as nuisance of the age due to a set of Vagrancy Acts, their literary characters were creating the image of rogues of the 'Elizabethan Underworld'. …
• NAID 120006606237

• Classifying nuisance submerged vegetation depending on ecosystem services (SPECIAL FEATURE : Ecological and limnological bases for management of overgrown macrophytes)

• Verhofstad Michiel J. J. M.,Bakker Elisabeth S.
• Limnology 20(1), 55-68, 2019-01
• NAID 40021798870

• 渡島大沼における富栄養化とアオコの発生,および環境に優しいアオコ対策の可能性 (特集 堰止湖の形成とその後の環境変動 : 北海道駒ヶ岳と渡島大沼を中心に)

• 今井 一郎,宮下 洋平,小林 淳希,大洞 裕貴
• 地形 40(1), 77-91, 2019-01
• NAID 40021784499

Related Links

• nuisanceの意味・使い方｜英辞郎 on the WEB：アルク

nuisance 【名】 不愉快なもの、迷惑、邪魔者、うるさい人、厄介者、妨害、迷惑な行為・It causes a nuisan...【発音！】[US] núːsəns ｜ [UK] njúːsəns【カナ】ニューサンス【変化】《複》nuisances - アルクがお届けするオンライン ...

• nuisanceの意味 - goo辞書 英和和英

nuisanceとは。意味や和訳。[名]1 〔しばしばa ～〕不愉快[迷惑]な人[もの，こと，行為]；やっかい者，じゃま者，困り者；迷惑make a nuisance of oneself＝make oneself a nuisance人に迷惑をかけるDon't be a nuisance!おいたしちゃ ...

• Nuisance - definition of nuisance by The Free Dictionary

2. (Law) law something unauthorized that is obnoxious or injurious to the community at large (public nuisance) or to an individual, esp in relation to his or her ... Noun 1. nuisance - (law) a broad legal concept including anything that ...

Related Pictures

---

★リンクテーブル★

リンク元

「extreme」

「extreme」

　　[★]

• adj.

• 極度な、極端な

Although diarrhea and constipation may present as mere nuisance symptoms at one extreme, they can be severe or life-threatening at the other.(HIM.246)(極端な例では単にやっかいな症状として出現することがあるが、もう一方の極端な場合、重篤で生命に危険を及ぼすことがありうる)

関

enormous、extremely、impossibly