A law firm is illuminating the legal specifics around nuisance lighting.
Following the situation in the Outer Battery, Scott Lynch of Budden & Associates is shining a light on the criteria courts consider when analyzing a civil claim of nuisance.
lynch-lawyer-budden-768×384.jpg 768w, https://vocm.com/files/2023/02/scott-lynch-lawyer-budden-605×303.jpg 605w” sizes=”(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px”/>
Photo via buddenlaw.com
Lynch writes that an actionable nuisance claim must involve interference with the enjoyment or use of one’s land, and the interference must be substantial and unreasonable.
A substantial interference is one that “rises above that of a slight annoyance”. After that has been determined, the courts consider factors such as severity of harm, character of the area, sensitivity of the plaintiff to the nuisance, and the necessity of the interference.
Lynch wrote that if there were multiple complaints in a given case, it’s unlikely that it would be categorized as an individual’s sensitivity.
He cites a case where it was ruled that “activities designed to annoy one’s neighbors and having little or no redemption of social utility are unreasonable and should be discouraged by the law”.
Check out our latest blog “What Constitutes Nuisance” written by our Solicitor Scott Lynch!https://t.co/ysnu3QfqeX
— Budden & Associates (@BuddenLaw) February 1, 2023