Peires v Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd

Peires v Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd

Helicopter training exercises involving landing, taking off, hovering, and turning on the aerodrome constitute 'flight' or ordinary incidents of flight within the meaning of section 76(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. The statutory immunity applies, barring the nuisance claim. The judge erred in law by adopting an unduly narrow interpretation of 'flight' and by importing a general requirement of reasonableness not found in the statute.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Lorna Peires; Defendant/appellant: Bickerton’s Aerodromes Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Statutory Immunity, Interpretation of Civil Aviation Act 1982, Noise From Aircraft, Injunctions
Tort Law Aviation Law Nuisance Statutory Immunity Interpretation of Civil Aviation Act 1982 Noise From Aircraft Injunctions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lorna Peires

Claimant/respondent

Bickerton’s Aerodromes Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether helicopter training exercises on the aerodrome constitute 'flight' under section 76(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 and are thus immune from nuisance claims
  2. 2 Whether the statutory immunity under section 76(1) applies to the facts
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in law in his interpretation of 'flight' and 'reasonableness' under the Act

Ratio Decidendi

Helicopter training exercises involving landing, taking off, hovering, and turning on the aerodrome constitute 'flight' or ordinary incidents of flight within the meaning of section 76(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. The statutory immunity applies, barring the nuisance claim. The judge erred in law by adopting an unduly narrow interpretation of 'flight' and by importing a general requirement of reasonableness not found in the statute.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The injunction granted by the High Court is set aside.
  • No damages awarded to the respondent.