ABATEMENT AS A DEFENCE IN TORTS



SELF HELP/ABATEMENT
Self help is a form of remedy whereby a person takes the law into his /her hands so as to solve a nuisance, trespass or other tortuous acts. The law does not enforce such a remedy and citizens who take the law into their hands do so at their own peril and run the risk of countervailing claims of trespass and conversion. This remedy saves much time and resources for taking matters to court.
Some of the instances in which self help may apply include:
1)      Self defense
This is the act of repelling an attack or a threatening attack that may constitute trespass to a person. Self defense is applicable in reasonable circumstances and with use of reasonable force
                             Cockroft vs Smith (1705)2 Salk 640
The clerk of a court sued an attorney for biting off his fore finger in scuffle in court. Holt CJ held that in itself it was no defense that the claimant had run his fingers downwards the defendant’s eyes for a man must not in a case of a small assault, give a violent or unreasonable return.
This remedy may also apply when resisting unlawful arrest.
Where one resists arrest, various factors are to be considered to determine if he is liable to any tort.
a)      Whether he could escape
b)      Whether he resisted with the most reasonable available force
c)      Whether he continued using force even after the condition cooled.
However, there need not be exact proportion between attack and response. Take an example of a case where a man who violently grabs a lady, squeezes her against the wall and starts kissing her. The lady is justified to use a pair of scissors to tear his hand if that is the only means she can use to defend herself.
2)      Defense of another person
Some instances in which one may defend another include:
a)      When an employee strikes someone in defense of his employer.
b)      A wife may also defend her husband if need be.
c)      A man is also entitled to defend any member of his family or household from danger under favorable circumstances.
3)      Defense of property
A person may use reasonable force to defend land or chattels in his possession against any person threatening to commit or actually committing trespass to the property.
4)      Abatement
This is a form of self help in which claimants intervene themselves to stop a nuisance.
Abatement must be exercised within a reasonable time after learning of the nuisance and usually requires
Notice to the defendant and the defendant’s failure to act. Reasonable fo0rce may be used to employ the abatement and a plaintiff may be liable for unreasonable or unnecessary damage.
An instance in which abatement may apply is where dead tree limbs extending dangerously over a neighbor’s house may be removed by the neighbor in danger after notifying the offending land owner of the nuisance. In cases where an immediate danger to health, property, or life exists, no notification is necessary.

Delaware Mansions Ltd and others Vs Westminster City council CA July1999
In 1989, structural engineers reported that damage had occurred to some blocks of flats and that a plane tree, which was owned by Westminster City council, was responsible for that damage. The engineers recommended under punning of the flats or removal of the tree. The council refused to remove the tree. The flat was sold in June 1990 to the second appellant company. The first appellant company was formed, and owned, by tenants to provide maintenance and service to the flats.
These companies were seeking damages from Westminster City Council for the cost of remedial works carried out to repair the foundations of the flats which cost some 570,735 pounds.
However, the claim was dismissed on the grounds that they could not claim for the damages b because the damage had occurred before they had become the new owners of the flat.
The plaintiffs appealed and won. Pill LJ said:
“Thus, where there is a continuing nuisance, the owner is entitled to a declaration to abate the nuisance, to abate the                                                                            nuisance to damages for future injury and to an injunction.”
And “If the council had agreed to remove the tree when asked, the damages would have been very small. In the circumstances, which    are probably unusual, the fact that the nuisance existed before the second appellant became the owner is irrelevant.”
My take on self help is that it is a convenient remedy in cases of emergency and it also saves time and resources of following the normal court procedure. Some of the most trivial issues should not be taken to court so I see no need for revision of the law on self help.



         


No comments:

Post a Comment