Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Audie Alexander Dennis & Anor v Head Start Day Nursery Ltd & Anor

Neighbours complained about nursery noise. A judge said the noise wasn't bad enough to be a legal problem. A higher court agreed, saying the judge was right about the noise and about who to believe.

Key Facts

  • Appeal against a District Judge's finding of not guilty on statutory nuisance charges related to noise from a nursery.
  • Appellants (landlord and tenant of adjacent property) claimed noise from the nursery (Head Start Day Nursery Ltd and The Childcare Corporation Ltd) constituted a statutory nuisance.
  • Six-day trial resulted in the District Judge finding the noise level did not meet the threshold for a nuisance.
  • The appeal focused on three questions regarding the District Judge's application of the law and assessment of evidence.

Legal Principles

Statutory nuisance under s.82 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 requires proving a nuisance exists or is likely to recur; an abatement order can be issued.

Environmental Protection Act 1990, s.82

A statutory nuisance must be either a private or public nuisance as understood by common law (National Coal Board v Neath Borough Council).

National Coal Board v Neath Borough Council [1976] 2 All E.R. 478

In private nuisance, interference must be substantial and judged objectively by the standards of an ordinary person (Fearn v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery; Walter v Selfe; Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd).

Fearn v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2024] A.C. 1; Walter v Selfe (1851) 4 De G & Sm 315; Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2013] QB 455

Even with substantial interference, there's no liability if the activity is the ordinary use of the defendant's land (Bamford v Turnley; Southwark London Borough Council v Tanner).

Bamford v Turnley (1862) 3 B & S 66; Southwark London Borough Council v Tanner [2001] 1 AC 1

A judge can disbelieve a witness even without a direct challenge to their credibility, especially if evidence is inconsistent with objective data (Chen v Ng).

Chen v Ng (British Virgin Islands) [2017] UKPC 27

Outcomes

Appeal dismissed.

The District Judge correctly applied the threshold test for substantial interference, finding the noise level did not meet the required standard. The Judge's assessment of witness credibility was also deemed justifiable.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.