Roper & Anor v Tussauds Theme Parks Ltd.

Roper & Anor v Tussauds Theme Parks Ltd.

The Crown Court's abatement order setting a 40dbA noise limit was rational, proportionate, and consistent with its findings of fact and applicable legal principles. Commercial considerations were properly considered as part of proportionality. The concert abatement order required clarification to ensure enforceability by reference to the Noise Council’s Code of Practice for venues with 4-12 events per year. Refusal to admit further expert evidence was a proper exercise of case management discretion.

Parties
Appellants: Stephen and Suzanne Roper; Defendant: Tussauds Theme Parks Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Crown Court Abatement Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save for clarification of the concert abatement order
Legal Topics
Statutory Nuisance, Noise Abatement, Case Management, Proportionality of Orders, Expert Evidence Admissibility
Environmental Law Administrative Law Statutory Nuisance Noise Abatement Case Management Proportionality of Orders Expert Evidence Admissibility

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen and Suzanne Roper

Appellants

Tussauds Theme Parks Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal From Crown Court Abatement Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the abatement order at 40dbA was irrational or inconsistent with findings of statutory nuisance
  2. 2 Whether commercial considerations were improperly considered in setting the abatement order
  3. 3 Whether the abatement order for concerts was clear and enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown Court's abatement order setting a 40dbA noise limit was rational, proportionate, and consistent with its findings of fact and applicable legal principles. Commercial considerations were properly considered as part of proportionality. The concert abatement order required clarification to ensure enforceability by reference to the Noise Council’s Code of Practice for venues with 4-12 events per year. Refusal to admit further expert evidence was a proper exercise of case management discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save for clarification of the concert abatement order

Orders

  • Declaration that the abatement order for concerts applies as if there are always at least four events per year, using the Noise Council’s Code of Practice for 4-12 events.
  • Declaration that daily operation noise limits apply concurrently with concert and firework events.