NUISANCE.

Railway bridge infested by pigeons - pigeon droppings affecting pavement and pedestrians walking underneath bridge - bridge owner liable in nuisanceWandsworth London Borough Council v Railtrack plc: QBD (Gibbs J): 31 July 2000

The council brought an action for, among other things, nuisance against the owner of a railway bridge, claiming that it had allowed pigeons to roost under its bridge and was liable for the state of affairs which had arisen due to pigeon droppings affecting pedestrians passing under the bridge and the pavement beneath the bridge.

Anthony Porten QC and Ranjit Bhose (instructed by Judge & Priestly, Bromley) for the council.

Timothy Dutton QC and Giles Wheeler ( instructed by Kennedys) for the defendant.

Held, giving judgment for the council, that the pigeon infestation and the fouling caused by it amounted to a nuisance; that the defendant had made no unnatural or unreasonable use of its land; that, although the nuisance had occurred without the defendant's act or default, the defendant had omitted to remedy it within a reasonable time or at all; that the fact that the pigeons were feral did not exempt the defendant from liability, having regard to the way the legal principles of nuisance have developed; that there was no distinction in law between nuisances which consisted of physical damage to property and the present circumstances in which inconvenience and interference with comfort were relied upon to establish nuisance; that the statutory duties or powers available to councils to maintain roads or deal with pigeons did not exempt the defendant from liability or make it inappropriate to impose liability on it; and that, accordingly, a public nuisance had been proved which the defendant was liable to remedy.