Critically examine the similarities and differences between public and Essay

Critically examine the similarities and differences between public and private nuisance. Support answer with relevant statute and case law - Essay Example Although such obstruction may cause inconvenience to many persons but none can be allowed to bring a civil action for that, otherwise there may be hundreds of actions for a. single act of public nuisance. To avoid multiplicity of suits the law makes public nuisance only an offence punishable under criminal law. In certain cases, when any person suffers some special or particular damage, different from what is inflicted upon public as a whole, a civil right of action is available to the person injured. What is otherwise a public nuisance, also becomes a private nuisance so far as the person suffering special damage as concerned. The expression special damage in this context means damage caused to a party in contradistinction to the public at largest For example, digging trench on a public highway may cause inconvenience to public at large. No member of the public, who is thus obstructed or has to take a diversion along with others, can sue under civil law. But if any one of them suffers more damage than suffered by the public at large, e.g., is severely injured by falling into the trench, he can sue in tort. In order to sustain a civil action in respect of a public nuisance proof of special and particular damage is essential. The proof of special damage entitles the plaintiff to bring a civil action for what may be otherwise a public nuisance. Thus, if the standing of horses and wagons for an unreasonably long time outside : mans house Creates darkness and bad smell for the occupants of the house and also obstructs the access of customers into it, the damage is ‘particular, direct and substantial’ and entitles the occupier to maintain an action.(Benjamin v. Storr,(1874) L.R.9C.P.400) In ‘Rose v. Milles’(1815; 4M.&S.101): the defendant wrongfully moored his barge across a public navigable crack. This blocked the way for plaintiffs barges and the plaintiff had to incur considerable