Facts
A doctor moved next door to a confectioner, who had produced sweets for sale in his kitchen for many years. The doctor constructed a small shed for the purpose of private practice. He built the shed on the boundary. However, the loud noises from the confectioner's industrial mortars and pestles could be clearly heard, disrupting his use and enjoyment of his land. He sought an injunction. The facts were described by Thesiger LJ in the Court of Appeal as follows,Judgment
The Court of Appeal held that the fact the doctor had "come to the nuisance", by which the Judge meant moved to an area where the nuisance had been operating for years without harming anyone, was no defence. The doctor's legal right to have the nuisance stopped was not lessened by the confectioner's longstanding practice. The text of Thesiger LJ's judgment follows.See also
*'' Robinson v Kilvert'' (1889) LR 41 ChD 88References
* * {{cite journal , last=Coase , first=Ronald H. , author-link=Ronald Coase , title= The Problem of Social Cost , journal= Journal of Law and Economics , volume=3 , issue=1 , pages=1–44 , year=1960 , s2cid=222331226 , doi=10.1086/466560 In which he argues the case was decided on poor grounds from an economic point of view. 1879 in case law 1879 in British law Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases English nuisance cases English tort case law