Peires v Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd [2016] EWHC 560 (Ch) (17 March 2016)

Peires v Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd [2016] EWHC 560 (Ch) (17 March 2016)

The helicopter training operations carried out by the Defendant and its licensees near the boundary constitute an unreasonable and excessive interference with the Claimant's enjoyment of her property, amounting to an actionable private nuisance. The Defendant has not acquired a prescriptive right due to longstanding...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 560 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Lorna Grace Peires; Defendant: Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Trial / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Defendant found liable for private nuisance.
Legal Topics
Private Nuisance, Noise Nuisance, Prescription, Statutory Defence, Liability of License Holders
Tort Law Private Nuisance Noise Nuisance Prescription Statutory Defence Liability of License Holders

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lorna Grace Peires

Claimant

Bickerton's Aerodromes Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether helicopter training operations at Denham Aerodrome constitute an actionable private nuisance by noise to the adjoining property owner
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant has acquired a prescriptive right to make such noise
  3. 3 Whether statutory defences under the Civil Aviation Act 1982 apply to the nuisance claim

Ratio Decidendi

The helicopter training operations carried out by the Defendant and its licensees near the boundary constitute an unreasonable and excessive interference with the Claimant's enjoyment of her property, amounting to an actionable private nuisance. The Defendant has not acquired a prescriptive right due to longstanding protests, and statutory defences under the Civil Aviation Act 1982 do not apply to the complained-of activity. The Defendant is liable for nuisance caused by its licensees.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Defendant found liable for private nuisance.

Orders

  • Defendant must abate the nuisance by restricting helicopter training operations near the boundary to defined periods and/or relocating the activity.
  • No damages awarded; remedy is by injunction or regulation of activity.