Hunt Leather Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW

Hunt Leather Pty Ltd and others brought a representative action against Transport for NSW, seeking damages for the nuisance they claimed resulted from the construction of the Sydney Light Rail. The plaintiffs argued that the construction caused substantial and unreasonable interference with their properties, affecting their use and enjoyment, and leading to economic loss. The court was required to determine whether the interference was substantial and unreasonable, if it was foreseeable, and whether the defendant failed to take care. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether section 43A of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) applied, whether Transport for NSW could rely on a defence of statutory authority, and if the defendant was liable for the nuisance. The court also needed to assess the period of the nuisance and the damages, including loss of profit.

The court examined the elements of private nuisance, considering the relevance of the common and ordinary use of land and the foreseeability of the interference. It noted that the interference must be substantial and unreasonable and that the defendant must have failed to take reasonable care. The court held that the defendant could not rely on a defence of statutory authority as the nuisance was not an authorised act. The court found that the interference was substantial and unreasonable, and that the defendant was liable for the nuisance. The court assessed the period of the nuisance and the damages, including loss of profit, and determined that the plaintiffs were entitled to compensation for their economic loss and loss of profit. The court also considered the plaintiffs' claims for mental anguish under public nuisance, finding that the plaintiffs did not suffer substantial damage over and above that suffered in common with other members of the public affected by the nuisance.

The court ordered Transport for NSW to pay damages to the plaintiffs for the economic loss and loss of profit they suffered as a result of the nuisance. The court found that the plaintiffs were not entitled to compensation for mental anguish under public nuisance. The court also considered the implications of section 141 of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW), which provides that a person who suffers damage by reason of a public nuisance cannot recover damages unless the damage is of a kind which the person suffering it would not have suffered if the nuisance had not been committed. The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to compensation for their economic loss and loss of profit, but not for mental anguish.