英国侵权法判例选

LAWOFDELICT-NOTESOFCASESDonoghuevStevenson1932SC(HL)31MrsDonoghuefoundadecomposedsnailinabottleofgingerbeerwhichhadbeenboughtforherbyafriend.Shesuedthemanufacturerofthegingerbeerindelictandhearguedthatheowedhernodutyofcare.Held:Amanufacturerowesadutyofcaretotheultimateconsumerofhisproduct.LordAtkinsaid:“Youmusttakecaretoavoidactsoromissionswhichyoucanreasonablyforeseewouldbelikelytoinjureyourneighbour.Whothen,inlaw,ismyneighbour?TheanswerseemstobepersonswhoaresocloselyanddirectlyaffectedbymyactthatIoughtreasonablytohavehadthemincontemplationasbeingsoaffectedwhenIamdirectingmymindtotheactsoromissionswhicharecalledinquestion.”MuirvGlasgowCorporation1943SC(HL)3Itwasheldthatthemanageressofatearoomowedageneraldutyofcaretothoseenteringthepremises,butnodutyofcaretotakeprecautionsagainstthembeinginjuredasaresultofhergivingpermissionforaSundaySchoolpicnictobeheldinthetearoom.Therewasnoreasonforhertoanticipatethatgivingpermissionwouldresultinchildrenbeingscaldedbyboilingwater.HughesvLordAdvocate1963SLT150(HL)Twoyoungchildrenwereinjuredwhentheydroppedaparaffinlampintoanopenmanhole.Bothopenmanholeandlamphadbeenleftunattendedbythedefenders.Itwasheldthat,althoughtheexplosionwasunforeseeable,itwasforeseeablethatchildrenwouldbeinjuredifanopenmanholeandaburninglampwereleftunattended.Therewassufficientforeseeabilitytoestablishadutyofcare.BourhillvYoung1942SC(HL)78Youngwaskilledasaresultofacollisioncausedbyhiscarelessdriving.Itwasheldthat,althoughhecertainlyowedadutyofcaretoavoidharmingotherroadusers,MrsBourhill,whowas50feetawayfromthecollisionanddidnotactuallyseeit,wasnotwithintheambitofthisduty.Young'sexecutorswerethereforenotliableforthenervousshockshesufferedasaresultoftheaccident.AlcockandOthersvChiefConstableofSouthYorkshire[1991]4AllER907(HL)TheactionwasbroughtbyrelativesofpersonskilledorinjuredatHillsboroughfootballstadium,onthebasisof“nervousshock”sufferedasaresultofthedisaster.Itwasheldthat,beforetherewouldbeliabilityforcausingnervousshock,certaincriteriamustbefulfilled:(a)Ithadtobereasonablyforeseeablethattheplaintiffwouldsuffernervousshock.Thiswouldarisewheretherewereclosetiesofaffectionbetweentheplaintiffandthevictim.(b)Theplaintiffmusthavebeenwithinsightorhearingoftheeventoritsimmediateaftermath.Identifyingadeadfriendorrelative8hourslater,orwatchingtheeventsontelevisionwasnotsufficientinthiscase.6.RobertsonvForthRoadBridgeJointBoard1994SLT566Twoworkerssufferedpsychiatrictraumawhentheywitnessedthedeathofafellowworkerwhichwascausedbythenegligenceoftheirmutualemployer.Held:Nodutyofcarewasowedtothetwoworkersinthisinstance.Therelationshipbetweenthemandtheworkerwhowaskilledwasnotsufficientlycloseforthenervousshocktobeforeseeable.7.McFarlanevEECaledoniaLtd[1994]2AllER1AworkeronthePiperAlphaoilrig,whowasonasupportvessel550metresawayfromtherigwhenitexploded,claimedagainsttheownersoftherigforthepsychiatricillnesshehadsufferedasaresultofwhathehadseen.Held:McFarlanewasnotinanyactualnodangerorfearsforhisownsafety.Hewasnotwithintherangeofforeseeabilityanddutyofcarewasowedtohim.8.SpartanSteelandAlloysLtdvMartin&CoLtd[1973]1QB27Buildersweresuedfordamagesarisingoutofdamagetoapowercablewhichinterruptedthepowersupplytoafactory.Held:Damagetometalinthefurnaceatthetimethecablewasdamagedwasrecoverable.Lossofprofitthroughprocessingtimelostwhilecablewasbeingrepairedwasnotrecoverable-thiswaspureeconomiclossandnodutyofcarewasowedinrespectofthis.9.HedleyByrne&CovHeller&Partners[1964]AC465Theplaintiffssoughtdamagesforlossesincurredbecauseofanegligentcreditrefereneegivenbythedefendantbank.Held:Althoughintheparticularcasethebankhadnoliabilitybecauseithadexpresslyexcludedliabilityforthereference,intheabsenceofadisclaimer,abankowedadutyofcaretoensurethatinformationwasaccurate.10.MartinvBell-Ingram1986SLT575Asurveyoremployedbyabuildingsocietytocarryoutavaluationonahousenegligentlymissedtheexisteneeoffaultsinthefoundations.Thehousepurchaserwasforcedtospendconsiderablesumstoremedythedefect.Held:Thesurveyorwasliabletothehousepurchaserforhisnegligenee.Heknewhisreportwouldbeseenbythepurchaserandreliedonbyhimindecidingwhethertopurchasethehouse.CaparoIndustriespicvDickman[1990]2WLR358Indecidingwhethertomakeatakeoverbidforacompany,theplaintiffreliedonaccountspreparedbythecompany'sauditors,whichturnedouttobeerroneous.Itwasadmittedtheauditorshadbeennegligentintheirpreparationoftheaccounts,butitwasheldthattheirdutyofcarewasowedtothecompanyonly,andnotindividualexistingorprospectiveshareholders.D&FEstatesvChurchCommissionersforEngland[1988]3WLR368Leaseholderssuedtorecovertheexpenseofrepairingdefectiveplasterworkwhichhadbeendone17yearsearlier.Held:Althoughplasterhadbeennegligentlyapplied,thecostofrepairingandreplacingthedefectiveplasterwaspureeconomiclossandnotrecoverable.MurphyvBrentwoodDistrictCouncil[1990]3WLR414byselldidAlocalauthoritywassuedwhenthefoundationsofahouse,builttoplansapprovedthelocalauthority,provedtobedefective.Becauseofthedefect,theownerhadtothehouseatconsiderablylessthanitsvalueifithadbeensound.Held:TheCouncilnotoweadutyofcaretopreventthiskindofeconomicloss,sothelosscouldnotberecoveredunderthelawofdelict.JuniorBooksvVeitchiCo1982SLT492Veitchi,aflooringspecialist,wasanominatedsub-contractorunderacontractbetweenJuniorBooksandOgilvieBuilderstoconstructanewfactory.Thefloorwasdefectiveandhadtobereplaced.JuniorBooksclaimedindelictagainstVeitchiforthecostofthisreplacement.Held:Theclaimwouldbeallowedeventhoughthelosswaspurelyeconomic.Therewasaspecialproximitybetweenthepartieswhichbroughtaboutadutyofcare.15.WaughvJamesKAllanLtd1964SC(HL)102Alorrydriverwhoinjuredapedestrianaftersufferingaheartattackwhiledrivingwasheldnottohavebreachedthedutyofcareheowedtothepedestrian.Hisactwasinvoluntaryandhehadnoreasontosuspecthewasseriouslyill.16.NettleshipvWeston[1971]2QB691Alearnerdriverfailedtostraightenthesteeringwheelafterturningacornerandranintoalamppost,damagingthepostandinjuringherdrivinginstructor.Held:Shewasliableforboththedamageandtheinstructor'sinjury.Alearnerdriverisexpectedtoshowthesamestandardofcareasanyotherdriver.17.BoltonvStone[1951]AC850Theplaintiffwasinjuredwhenacricketballwashitoutofthegrounds.Thishadhappenedonly6timesin30yearsandno-onehadbeeninjuredbefore.Held:Therewasnonegligenceinfailingtotakeprecautionsagainstthis.Theriskwassoslightthatanyreasonablepersoninthesamepositionwouldhavefeltjustifiedinignoringit.18.ParisvStepneyBoroughCouncil[1951]AC367TheplaintiffwasamechanicemployedbytheCouncil.Hisemployersknewhewasblindinoneeye.Achipofmetalflewintohisgoodeye,leavinghimtotallyblind.Heclaimedhisemployerswerenegligentinnotsupplyinghimwithgoggles.Theybroughtevidenceshowingthiswasnotusualpracticeinthetrade.Held:Becausethemagnitudeoftheriskwasgreaterinthisparticularcase,theemployerswerenegligentinnotprovidinggogglesforthisparticularemployee.19.WattvHertfordshireCountyCouncil[1954]1WLR835Afiremanwasinjuredwhenaheavyjackshiftedwhilebeingcarriedinalorrynotespeciallyequippedtocarryit.Thefireservicewasonitswaytorescueawomantrappedunderacar.Itwasheldthatthefireauthoritywasnotnegligentbecausetherisktothefiremanwasnotsogreatastoprohibittheattempttosavealife.20.LatimervAECLtd[1953]AC643Thedefendant'sfactorywasfloodedafterexceptionallyheavyrain,leavingthefloorslippery.Thedefendant'ssweptthefloorandputdownsawdust,buttheplaintiffwasinjuredwhenheslippedonanuntreatedpartofthefloor.Heclaimedthedefendantwasnegligentinnotclosingthefactory.Held:Theemployerhaddoneallthatcouldreasonablybeexpected.Theriskofinjuryasnotsogreatastojustifytheexpenseofclosingdownthefactory.21.HuntervHanley1955SC200Ahypodermicneedlebrokewhilethepursuerwasbeinggivenaninjection.Sheclaimedthedoctorwasnegligentinusingthewrongtypeofneedle.LordClydesaid:“Toestablishliabilitybythedoctorwheredeviationfromnormalpracticeisalleged,threefactsrequiretobeestablished.Firstofallitmustbeprovedthereisausualandnormalpractice;secondlyitmustbeprovedthatthedefenderhasnotadoptedthatpractice;andthirdly(andthisisofcrucialimportanee)itmustbeestablishedthatthecoursethedoctoradoptedisonewhichnoprofessionalmanofordinaryskillwouldhavetakenifhehadbeenactingwithordinarycare.Thereisclearlyaheavyonusuponapursuertoestablishthesethreefacts,andwithoutallthreehiscasewillfail.”22.ScottvLondonandStCatherineDocksCo[1861-73]AllER246Theplaintiffprovedthatsixbagsofsugarfellonhimwhilehewaspassingunderacrane.butwasunabletoshowhowtheaccidenthadhappened.ErleCJheldthat:“Theremustbereasonableevideneeofnegligenee.Butwherethethingisshowntobeunderthemanagementofthedefendantorhisservants,andtheaccidentissuchthatinthenormalcourseofthingsdoesnothappenifthosewhohavethemanagementusepropercare,itaffordsreasonableevideneeintheabseneeofexplanationbythedefendants,thattheaccidentarosefromwantofcare.”EassonvLondon&NorthEastRailway[1944]KB421Achildfellfromanopendooronatrain.Therewasnoevideneeofhowthedoorcametobeopen.Held:Theplaintiffscouldnotrelyonresipsaloquitur.Althoughtheaccidentbeeninterferedwithcouldhavebeenthefaultoftherailway,thedoorcouldalsohavebyathirdparty.BarnettvChelseaandKensingtonHospital[1969]1QB428Amanwhovomitedforthreehoursafterdrinkingacupofteacalledatthecasualtydepartmentofthedefendanthospital.Thedoctorrefusedtoseehimandseveralhourslaterthemandiedofarsenicpoisoning.Held:Thedoctorwasinbreachofhisdutyofcare,butthiswasnotacauseofthedeath;themanwouldhavediedevenifhehadbeentreatedbythehospital.KayvAyrshireandArranHealthBoard1987SLT(HL)577Achildsufferingfrommeningitiswasgivenamassiveoverdoseofpenicillin.Onrecoveryhewasfoundtobedeaf.Therewasnoevideneeofapenicillinoverdoseevercausingdeafness,butmanycasesofdeafnesscausedbymeningitis.TheHouseofLordsheldthatthepursuerhadabsolutelyfailedtoprovecausationandfoundtheHealthBoardnotliable.McWilliamsvArrol1962SC(HL)70Asteelerectorfelltohisdeathbecausehewasnotwearingasafetyharness.Hisemployerswerenegligentinfailingtosupplyharnesses.Evideneeputbeforethecourtconclusivelyshowedthatthedeceasedwouldnothavewornaharnessevenifonehadbeenavailable.Held:Therewasnoproofofacausalconnectionbetweenthebreachofdutyandthedeath.Theemployerswerenotliable.WardlawvBonningtonCastings1956SC(HL)26Thepursuercontractedpneumoconiosisfrominhalingdustatwork.Thereweretwosourcesofthedust,onlyoneofwhichwaspreventable.Thedefenderswerenotinbreachofdutyintheirfailuretoprotectthepursuerfromthedustwhichcouldnotbeprevented,anditwasnotknownwhichsourceofdustwasthecauseoftheillness.Held:Thedefenderwouldbeliableifthebreachofdutyhadmateriallycontributedtothepursuer'sinjury.Inthiscasethecourtconsideredthatithad,andthepursuersucceededinhisclaimfordamages.SayersvHarlowUrbanDistrictCouncil[1958]2AllER342Awomanwhowastrappedinapublictoiletbecauseofthedefendant'sbreachofdutywasinjuredwhenshetriedtoclimbout.Held:Itwasforeseeablethatsomeoneinherpositionwouldtrytoescape,thereforethisdidnotamounttonovusactusinterveniens.McKewvHolland,Hannen&Cubitts(Scotiand)Ltd1970SLT68Thedefendersnegligentlyinjuredthepursuer'sleftleg,whichwasthenliabletogivewaywithoutwarning.Somedayslater,thepursuerwasdescendingsteepstairswhenhisleggaveway.Hethenjumpeddowntothenextlandingandfracturedhisrightleg.Held:Thedefenderswerenotliablefortheinjurytotherightleg,becausethepursuer'sconductwasunreasonableandconstitutedanovusactusinterveniens.DonaghyvNationalCoalBoard1957SLT(Notes)35Thepursuertookhomeadetonatorwhichhisemployershadnegligentlyleftlyingaroundhisplaceofwork.Itexplodedwhenhehititwithahammerandhewasinjured.Held:TheCoalBoardwasnotliable.Thepursuer'sactionwerenovusactusinterveniens.OverseasTankship(UK)LtdvMortDocks&EngineeringCo(TheWagonMoundNo1)1961AC388OilwasnegligentlyspilledfromtheWagonMoundandwascarriedtowheretheplaintiffswerewelding.Moltenmetalsetalightapieceofcottonwastewhichinturnsetfiretotheoil.Thefiredamagedtheplaintiff'swharf.Held:Thedamagecausedbythefirewasunforeseeableandthereforetooremotetoberecovered.CampbellvMoffat(Transport)Ltd1992SLT962Thepursuerwasforcedtogiveuphisjobasaresultofinjuriessustainedinaroadaccident.Twoyearslaterthemillclosedandthosestillworkinginitatthetimeweregivenanexgratiaredundancypayment.Inhisactionfordamageswithregardtotheroadaccident,thepursuerclaimedforthelossoftheredundancypayment.Held:Thoughthislosswasnotforeseeable,itwasnotsospeculativethatitcouldnotberegardedasanaturalanddirectconsequeneeoftheaccident.SmithvLeechBrain&Co[1961]2QB405Smithwasinjuredatworkowingtohisemployer'snegligenee.Theinjuryinducedacancerfromwhichhelaterdied.Itwasheldthathisemployerswereliableforhisdeath,eventhoughthiswasnotaforeseeableconsequeneeoftheinjury.AndersonvStAndrewsAmbulaneeAssociation1943SC248Apassengeronabuswasinjuredwhenthebuscollidedwithanambulanee.Bothbusdriverandambulaneedriverwereheldtoberesponsiblefortheaccident.Theywerejointlyliableasbothhadcontributedmateriallytothepursuer'sinjury.BarnesvFlucker1985SLT142Twofiveyearoldswhoranintothepathofacarandcausedanaccidentwereheldtoberesponsiblefortheaccident.(TheScottishLawCommissionhasrecommendedthatliabilityfordelictshouldnotattachtoachildundertheageof12).NewtonvEdgerley19591WLR1031Atwelveyearoldboyinjuredanotherboywithashotgungiventohimbyhisfather.Itwasheldthatthefatherwaspersonallyliablefortheinjuries,ashehadbreachedhisdutyofcaretoexerciseadequatesupervisionoverhisson'suseofthegun.MarshallvWilliamSharpe&Sons1991SLT114AnelectricianwhowasemployedbySharpeasanindependentcontractoratanhourlyratecarelesslyinjuredoneofSharpe'semployees.Itwasheldthattheelectricianwasanindependentcontractor,butthatSharpewasvicariouslyliableforhisnegligeneebecausethedegreeofcontrolwhichSharpeexercisedoverhimmadetherelationshipsimilartothatsubsistinginanemploymentrelationship.MerseyDocksandHarbourBoardvCoggins&GriffithLtd[1947]AC1ThedefendanthiredacraneandoperatorfromMerseyDocksunderacontractwhichstatedthatthecraneoperatorwastoberegardedasanemployeeofthedefendant.ThecraneoperatornegligentlyinjuredanotherofCoggins&Griffith'semployeesandthequestionaroseastowhich“employer”wasliableforhisactions.Held:Liabilitywasnottobedeterminedbythecontractbetweentheparties.MerseyDockswastheemployerandwouldremainliableuniesstheycouldshowthatfullcontroloverthecraneoperatorhadpassedtothedefendant.Thistheyhadfailedtodo.RosevPlenty[1976]1AllER97Amilkfloatdriverwhoknewhewasnotallowedtohavechildrenhelphimwithhisroundemployedathirteenyearoldboy,whowasinjuredbythemilkman'snegligenee.Thedairyarguedthatthemilkmanwasactingoutsidethecourseofhisemploymentsothattheywerenotliablefortheinjuries.Held:Themilkmanwasengagedinhisemploymentandtheaccidentoccurredwithinthescopeofhisemployment.Thedairywasvicariouslyliable.40.CenturyInsuraneevNorthernIrelandTransportBoard[1942]AC509anWhiledeliveringpetrol,anemployeelitacigaretteandthrewthematchaway,eausingexplosionandfire.Itwasheldthat,althoughsmokingwasnotpartofhisemployment.hewasstillactingwithinthescopeofhisemploymentwhenhecausedthedamage.Hisemployerswereliable.41.RaynorvMitchell(1877)2CPD257Abreweryworkerwhotookhisemployer'svanwithoutpermissionanduseditforprivatepurposeswasnotactingwithinthescopeofhisemploymenteventhoughhepickedupsomeemptybarrelsonhiswaytoreturnthevan.Hisemployerswerenotliableforinjurieshecausedwhendrivingthevan.42.AngusvGlasgowCorporation1977SLT206Adriverwhodeviatedfromhisroutetocollecthissparespectaclesfromhishomewhenhisusualpairhadbrokenwasheldinvolvedinanaccident.Held:Hewasstillactingwithinthescopeofhisemployment.Adriverremainswithinthescopeofhisemploymentuniesshecanberegardedashavingseveredallconnectionswithhisemployer'sbusiness.43.PolandvJohnParr&Sons[1927]1KB236Avandriverwhoassaultedaboyhethoughtwasstealingfromhisemployer'svanwasheldtobeactingwithinthecourseofhisemploymentbecausehewasactingtoprotecthisemployer'sproperty.Theemployerwasthusvicariouslyliablefortheassault.44.WarrenvHenly'sLtd[1958]2AllER935Apetrolstationattendantbecameabusivetotheplaintiffwhenhethoughthewasgoingtoleavewithoutpayingforpetrol.Aftertheplaintiffhadpaid,theattendantstruckhim.Held:Theattendant'semployerwasnotliableforthisassault,asitwasnotwithinthescopeoftheemployment.Theemployee'sdutytohisemployerceasedoncetheplaintiffhadpaidforthepetrol.45.ListervRomfordIceandColdStorageCo[1957]AC555Lister,adriver,injuredanotheremployee(hisfather)whencarelesslyreversingalorry.Thecompanysinsurerspaiddamagestothefatherandsoughttorecovertheamountpaidfromtheson.Itwasheldtheywereentitledtodoso.CaledonianRailwayCovGreenockCorporation1917SC(HL)56Heavyraincausedapoolcreatedbythedefenderstoflood,damagingthepursuer'sproperty.Thedefendersclaimed,interalia,thattheexceptionalnatureoftherainamountedtodamnumfatale,andthattheywerenottoblame.Held:Althoughtherainhadbeenunusuallyheavy,heavyrainwasnotsounusualinScotlandastoamounttoanunforeseeableevent.MorrisvMurray[1991]2QB6Apilotkilledhimselfandseriouslyinjuredhispassenger(theplaintiff)whenhecrashedhislightaircraft.Thepilothadbeendrinkingheavilyandtheplaintiffknewthiswhenhewentfortheflight.Theplaintifffailedinhisactionagainstthedeceasedpilot'sestate.Hewasawareoftheriskhewastakingandthedefeneeofvolentinonfitinjuriaapplied.ICIvShatwell[1965]AC656Twobrothers,bothexperieneedshotfirers,agreedtotestdetonatorswithoutobeyingsafetyregulationsimposedbytheiremployers.Bothwereinjuredwhenoneofthedetonatorsexploded.OneofthebrotherssuedtheiremployeronthebasisthatICIwerevicariouslyliableforinjuriescausedtohimbythenegligeneeofhisfellowworker.Held:ICIwerenotliable.Shatwellhadvoluntarilyconsentedtoariskofwhichhewaswellaware.BakervTEHopkins&SonsLtd[1959]1WLR966Adoctorwhoenteredawellcontainingpoisonousfumestorescuetwocomatoseworkersdiedwhentheropebywhichhewasloweredcaughtonanobstruction.Hiswidowsuedtheemployerofthetwoworkers,whoclaimedthedoctorhadassumedtheriskofgoingdownthewell.Held:Thedefeneeofvolentinonfitinjuriadidnotapplyincaseswheresomeoneassumesariskinanemergencyrescuesituation.CorkvKirkbyMaclean[1952]2AllER402Aworkerwho,unknowntohisemployers,sufferedfromepilepsyandwasnotsupposedtoworkatheights,wasinjuredfallingfromaplatformduringaseizure.Hisemployerswerefoundtobenegligentinnotfittingaguardrailtotheplatform,buttheworkerwas51.to52.aasan53.recklesslythe54.keeper55.thewasfoundtobe50%responsibleforhisowninjuriesanddamageswerereducedbythatamount.FroomvButcher[1975]3AllER520Amotoristinjuredinaroadaccidentforwhichhewasinnowaytoblamewasfoundhavecontributedtohisowninjuriesbyhisfailuretowearaseatbelt.Damageswerereducedby15%.WeirvWyper1992SLT579Thepursuerwasinjuredwhenthecarinwhichshewasapassengerwasinvolvedinacollision.Shehadagreedtorideinthecareventhoughsheknewthedriveronlyhadprovisionallicenee.Itwasheldthatshewasnotbarredfromrecoveringdamagesbythefactthatshewasinvolvedinillegalactivity.Thedefeneewouldnotalwaysoperateabsolutebartodamages.(Thoughanydamagescouldbereducedonthegroundsofcontributorynegligenee.)PittsvHunt[1991]1QB24Theplaintiffwasapillionpassengeronamotorcyclewhichwasbeingriddenwhenitcollidedwithacar.Evidenceshowedthattheplaintiffhadbeenencouragingdrivertoriderecklesslyandtointimidateotherroadusers.Hisclaimfordamageswasdisallowedbecausehehadbeeninvolvedintheillegalactivity.BehrensvBertramMillsCircus[1957]2QB1Acircuselephantwhichwasfrightenedbyadoginjuredtwopeople.Althoughtherewasnoevidenceofafailuretotakereasonablecare,itwasheldthatthefailureofthetocontroltheelephantwassufficienttoestablishliability,whichwasstrict.McQuakervGoddard19401KB662Avisitortoazoowasinjuredwhenbittenbyacamel.Therewasnowantofcareonpartofthezoo,butitwasquestionedwhetherthecamelcamewithinthecategoryofanimalsforwhichtherewasstrictliability.Evidencewasledtoshowthatthecameloneoftheearliestdomesticanimals.56.MillervJackson[1977]QB966Cricketballswereregularlyhitoutofacricketgroundintotheplaintiff'sgarden,causingdamage.Itwasheldthatthisamountedtoanuisanee.(ContrastwithBoltonvStone(Case17)).57.Cumnock&DoonValleyDistrictCouncilvDaneeEnergyAssociates1992GWD25-1441Aravewhichwasbeingheldinanisolatedlocationdidnotconstituteanuisaneebecauseitwasaone-offevent.58.WebstervLordAdvocate1985SLT361Thepursuer,whoownedaflatnearEdinburghCastle,claimedthatthenoisefromtheEdinburghTattooandtheancillaryworkassociatedwithitconstitutedanuisanee.Itwasheldthat,thoughtheTattooitselfdidnotconstituteanuisanee,theassociatedworkdid.Itmad