Bifalgorithm post · Property · Would you need to show evidence of harm to sue successfully a

Factory Nuisance

Factory Nuisance (Property · Would you need to show evidence of harm to sue successfully a) — "If the factory were there first, most courts would decide that I…

Ideas in this flowchart

  • Si la fábrica hubiera estado allí primero, los tribunales probablemente rechazarían tanto la reclamación por nuisance como el cierre de la fábrica.
  • La fábrica fue establecida antes que la residencia.
  • «Come to the nuisance» es una defensa frente a una reclamación por nuisance.
  • Con esta defensa, los tribunales generalmente considerarían que no existe nuisance.
  • En este caso, la mayoría de los tribunales no concedería el remedio de Spur.
  • El remedio de Spur permitiría cerrar la fábrica si se pagaran daños y perjuicios.
  • En términos de Calabresi, esto protegería a la fábrica mediante una regla de responsabilidad.
  • A diferencia de Spur, la fábrica afecta a pocas residencias, pero a muchas otras empresas industriales.
  • Los costes relevantes incluyen los perjuicios al residente y a terceros no representados, como los residentes de Sun City en Spur.
  • Es improbable que esos costes superen ampliamente los beneficios de las actividades de la fábrica.
  • Por ello, no tendría sentido ordenar el cierre de la fábrica, ni siquiera mediante el pago de daños y perjuicios.
Bifalgorithm
Sign up
Feed/

Factory Nuisance

Channel

Property

1 page

U
USR292600b83e2a
Ebook2w

"If the factory were there first, most courts would decide that I had “come to the nuisance.” This is a defense to nuisance, meaning that courts will generally hold there is no nuisance at all under such facts. Going further, most courts would not, in this case, give me the Spur remedy: the ability to shut down the factory if I pay damages (in Calabresi language: protection of the factory, but only with a liability rule). Unlike in Spur, there are not many other residences impacted by the factory. Rather there are a great many other industrial concerns. Thus, it is unlikely that a court would decide that the costs of the factory’s activities (to both me and unrepresented third parties—like the residents of Sun City in Spur) greatly exceed its benefits. Given that, it would not make sense to order the factory shut down, even on payment of damages."

Flowchart preview
Series cover
👍
0
0 comments0 shares

Sign in to view and post comments.