Coventry (t/a RDC Promotions) & Anor v Lawrence & Ors (Rev 1)

Coventry (t/a RDC Promotions) & Anor v Lawrence & Ors (Rev 1)

The noise from the motor sports activities, carried out with the benefit of planning permissions and a certificate of lawful use, had become an established and dominant feature of the locality. The grant and implementation of planning permissions changed the character of the area, and the judge erred in law by failing to assess nuisance against this changed character. As a result, the activities did not constitute a nuisance in law.

Parties
Second Defendant/appellant: David Michael Coventry (T/A RDC Promotions); Third Defendant/appellant: Moto-Land UK Limited; Claimant/respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Katherine Lawrence; Claimant/respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Raymond Shields; Fourth Defendant/respondent on Cross Appeal: Terence Raymond Waters; Sixth Defendant/respondent on Cross Appeal: James Edwards Waters
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Private Nuisance, Planning Permission, Character of Locality, Injunctions, Damages, Prescription, Easements
Tort Law Planning Law Private Nuisance Planning Permission Character of Locality Injunctions Damages Prescription +1 more

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Michael Coventry (T/A RDC Promotions)

Second Defendant/appellant

Moto-Land UK Limited

Third Defendant/appellant

Katherine Lawrence

Claimant/respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Raymond Shields

Claimant/respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Terence Raymond Waters

Fourth Defendant/respondent on Cross Appeal

James Edwards Waters

Sixth Defendant/respondent on Cross Appeal

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether noise from motor sports activities constituted a private nuisance in light of planning permissions and certificate of lawful use
  2. 2 Whether planning permission and its implementation changed the character of the locality so as to affect nuisance liability
  3. 3 Whether claimants could claim nuisance having moved into an area with established noisy activities

Ratio Decidendi

The noise from the motor sports activities, carried out with the benefit of planning permissions and a certificate of lawful use, had become an established and dominant feature of the locality. The grant and implementation of planning permissions changed the character of the area, and the judge erred in law by failing to assess nuisance against this changed character. As a result, the activities did not constitute a nuisance in law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimants' action dismissed.
  • Cross-appeal dismissed.