Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

King v The Advocate General for Scotland.

Country/Territory
United Kingdom
Type of court
National - lower court
Date
Dec 11, 2009
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
COURT OF SESSION
Seat of court
London
Judge
Pentland
Reference number
[2005] CSOH 169
Language
English
Subject
Air & atmosphere, Environment gen.
Keyword
Air quality/air pollution Noise pollution Air pollution (non-stationary sources) Noise standards Vehicle noise Noise emission Military activities Aircraft noise
Abstract
The pursuer resided in premises which were situated near Castle Douglas. The area was used by the Royal Air Force for the purposes of low-flying training. The pursuer claimed that the noise from military aircraft which flew at a height of less than 250 feet above the ground created an unacceptable level of disturbance and, therefore, amounted to a nuisance in law. The pursuer claimed that the noise from the aircraft had not only caused her great personal annoyance but had also caused physical injuries to the horses which she kept on the premises. The pursuer also claimed that the noise amounted to an infringement of her rights under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) and also Article 1 of Protocol 1 (which guarantee respect for family life and home as well as the right to peaceful enjoyment of property and possessions) The Lord Ordinary (Lord Pentland) held that the pursuer (who represented herself) had failed to adduce sufficient evidence to support her action, both in terms of nuisance and, also, in terms of the Convention. In the last analysis, the amount of flights which the RAF had actually made over the pursuer’s property was substantially less than the pursuer had claimed. The pursuer had also failed to lead any evidence of the noise levels to which she was exposed. Furthermore, she had not adduced any veterinary evidence to support her claim that her horses had sustained injury.
Full text
COU-159870.pdf