Top Left Background Top Right Background
Bottom Right Background

Sturges v Bridgman [1879]

Facts

  • Defendant owned large pestle and mortar, which the claimant did not complain about for a while
  • The claimant then bought a consulting ‘shed’, at which point the large pestle and mortar became a nuisance

Issue

  • Could the defence of 20 years prescription be used

Decision

  • No, claim succeeded

Reasoning

  • As the nuisance only became actionable at the time of purchase of the ‘shed’, it had not been actionable for 20 years, although the activity had occurred for more than 20 years

 

Goto Top
Close Notification

Recent News

Other News