UNIT 6

PUBLIC NUISANCE

Public nuisance occurs when an act or omission interferes with the rights of the public or a significant portion of the community. It affects the public at large and is considered a crime as well as a civil wrong. See the case of A-G v PYA Quarries Ltd [1957] 2 QB 169 which provides a definition of public nuisance, stating that it is an act or omission which materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of life of a class of Her Majesty's subjects. The elements of public nuisance includes the following;

1. Interference with public rights: this is where the act must interfere with rights common to the general public.
2. Substantial and unreasonable interference: this is where the interference must be substantial and unreasonable.
3. Special damage: this is where an individual can only sue for public nuisance if they have suffered special damage beyond that suffered by the general public.

PRIVATE NUISANCE

Private nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of their land. Unlike public nuisance, it affects an individual's right to enjoy their property. See the case of Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd v Chief Otoko and Others (1990) 6 NWLR (Pt. 159) 693 where the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that continuous noise and vibrations from Shell’s operations constituted a private nuisance. The elements of private nuisance includes the following;

1. Interference with use and enjoyment of land: this is where there must be an interference with the claimant's use or enjoyment of land.
2. Unreasonable use: this is where the defendant’s use of land must be unreasonable.
3. Damage: this is where the claimant must show that they have suffered damage as a result of the interference.

BASIS OF LIABILITY IN PRIVATE NUISANCE

1. Fault: this is where the defendant's conduct must be intentional, negligent, or inherently dangerous.
2. Duration and nature of interference: this happens where the longer and more severe the interference, the more likely it will be deemed unreasonable.
3. Sensitivity of the claimant: this is where the defendant is not liable for damage caused by the abnormal sensitivity of the claimant.
4. Locality: this happens if what constitutes a nuisance can depend on the nature of the locality.

THE RULE IN RYLANDS V FLETCHER

The rule in Rylands v Fletcher (1868) established strict liability for the escape of hazardous substances from a person's land. See the case of Umudje v Shell BP Petroleum Development Co. of Nigeria Ltd (1975) 9-11 SC 155 where the Supreme Court of Nigeria applied the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, holding Shell liable for damages caused by the escape of crude oil from their pipeline. The elements of the rule includes the following;

1. Accumulation on defendant’s land: this is where the defendant must have brought or accumulated something on their land.
2. Likely to cause mischief if it escapes: this is where the thing brought or kept must be likely to cause mischief if it escapes.
3. Non-natural use of land: this is where the use of the land must be non-natural.
4. Escape and damage: this is where there must be an escape and damage as a result.

LIABILITY OF ANIMALS

The classifications of animals includes the Ferae Naturae which are the wild animals and the Mansuetae Naturae which are the domesticated animals. Under liability, there is the strict liability which makes the owners of ferae naturae (wild animals) strictly liable for any damage caused by the animals and the Scienter Rule which makes the owners of mansuetae naturae (domesticated animals) only liable if they knew or ought to have known that the animal had a propensity to cause harm (scienter rule). See the case of Egbuonu v Borno Radio Television Corporation (1997) 12 NWLR (Pt. 531) 29 where the court held the defendant liable for damages caused by their dog, applying the scienter rule. See also the Criminal Code Act under section 245 of the Criminal Code Act (Cap C38, LFN 2004) which imposes criminal liability for negligence resulting in harm caused by animals and the Animals (Diseases) Act which provides regulations on the control of diseases among animals and liability for damages caused by diseased animals.

CONCLUSION

Nuisance, both public and private, the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, and liability for animals are important areas of tort law. These principles protect individuals from unreasonable interference with their rights and provide remedies for harm caused by hazardous activities and animals. The Nigerian legal system has embraced these doctrines, adapting them to local contexts through statutory provisions and judicial decisions.