M'Ewen and Others v. Steedman & M'Alister [1911] ScotLR 136 (21 November 1911)

M'Ewen and Others v. Steedman & M'Alister [1911] ScotLR 136 (21 November 1911)

The vibration from the defenders' gas engine caused both structural injury and material discomfort to the tenants of the pursuers' property, amounting to a nuisance. The pursuers, as proprietors (including one in occupation), are entitled to interdict to protect their property and tenants' comfort, regardless of whether all are in occupation. The Sheriff-Substitute's findings were set aside as contrary to the weight of evidence.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 136
Parties
Pursuers/appellants: Mrs Mary Gibb or M'Ewen, James Gibb and William Gibb; Defenders/respondents: Steedman & M'Alister
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 November 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (nuisance/interdict) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; pursuers found entitled to interdict, but implementation delayed for two months to allow defenders to abate the nuisance; cause continued quoad ultra.
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Interdict (injunction), Landlord's Rights, Tenant's Comfort, Structural Damage, Title to Sue
Property Law Tort Law Landlord and Tenant Law Nuisance Interdict (injunction) Landlord's Rights Tenant's Comfort Structural Damage +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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Mary Gibb or M'Ewen, James Gibb and William Gibb

Pursuers/appellants

Steedman & M'Alister

Defenders/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (nuisance/interdict) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether vibration from a gas engine in adjacent premises constitutes a nuisance justifying interdict.
  2. 2 Whether a proprietor not in occupation has title to seek interdict for discomfort to tenants.
  3. 3 Whether structural damage and/or material discomfort to tenants is established.

Ratio Decidendi

The vibration from the defenders' gas engine caused both structural injury and material discomfort to the tenants of the pursuers' property, amounting to a nuisance. The pursuers, as proprietors (including one in occupation), are entitled to interdict to protect their property and tenants' comfort, regardless of whether all are in occupation. The Sheriff-Substitute's findings were set aside as contrary to the weight of evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; pursuers found entitled to interdict, but implementation delayed for two months to allow defenders to abate the nuisance; cause continued quoad ultra.

Orders

  • Recall of Sheriff-Substitute's interlocutor.
  • Finding of fact and law that pursuers are entitled to protection against continuance of the nuisance.