St Helen’s Smelting Co v Tipping (1865) 11 HLC 642

Court: House of Lords

Basic Facts: The claimant bought a house in the industrial part of a town so you have to expect a certain amount of industrial processes occuring i.e. there will be a certain level of pollution, smell, and noise. Nevertheless, this does not mean the factories can do what they want. The claimant here was complaining that because of the factories his plants were dying

Issue: Can a person claim damages for a nuisance that existed before they took possession of the affected land?

Held: The House of Lords ruled in favor of the claimant. The court held that the character of the neighbourhood was irrelevant when it comes to the use of land that causes physical damage to another person's property. The decision established that any use of land that results in property damage is inherently unreasonable, regardless of the nature of the surrounding area or any other contextual factors.

• Bruce LJ: No, a claimant cannot claim damages for a nuisance that existed before they took possession of the land. The fact that C voluntarily came to the nuisance does not alter this principle.

💡Level up : This case is used for the principle that a use of land that causes property damage to another person’s land is automatically unreasonable, irrespective of the character of the neighborhood or other factors.