ChatterBank9 mins ago
does the word 'annoyance' have any legal definition?
We've had a draft contract come through on some land we're buying with a covenant not to use the land for any purpose which may become obnoxious or cause annoyance to the neighbouring land owner (who we are buying the land from). I have no objection to the work 'obnoxious' as I presume there are legal implications of what and what is not 'obnoxious' (pig farm in residential area for example) -But surely 'annoyance' is very subjective and loose? -what annoys one person may not annoy another -is there a legal definition?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Kristal53. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It may be worth 'nailing down' exactly the uses which are/are not acceptable.
You are quite right, we all think we know just what 'annoyance' actually is but should the situation ever become subject to litigation, it may become onerous and expensive to prove that your legitimate usage of it is *not* an annoyance to your neighbour.
You are quite right, we all think we know just what 'annoyance' actually is but should the situation ever become subject to litigation, it may become onerous and expensive to prove that your legitimate usage of it is *not* an annoyance to your neighbour.
so if anyone finds the noise/activity unbearable, then you will have to cease. Reasonability always rules these cases - i.e. the principles of the Lady with the Scales of Justice over the Old Bailey.......so them going on about you horse riding at 3pm is unreasonable and would be dismissed, whereas you riding at 11pm with lights over your "arena" is unreasonable and annoying.
In summary, common sense.
In summary, common sense.
If it is only a draft ask him to clarify or choose an alternative word that is definable (difficult as that may be.) An addendum with a list of example annoyances might work.
Is there a clause which allows you 'full and free use' or similar? You may like to consider the inclusion of such a clause if not.
Is there a clause which allows you 'full and free use' or similar? You may like to consider the inclusion of such a clause if not.
@DTcrosswordfan -yes -I agree and do not want to be put in a situation where I almost have to ask permission before i can enjoy using the land how I want to. We are rural but these issues of lighted riding arenas have come up -not that this is applicable as i'm far too old and sensible to be outdoors riding at 11pm but know what you mean. I'm asking for 'annoyance' to be taken out of the Contract as its too ambiguous.
Does this help? Note that it says the word annoyance means, literally, a niusance...
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/n025.htm
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/n025.htm
I would start by removing the clause all together.
I would have a chat with the seller and explain that your purpose is as you have said. However, if you were to sell on, you would include a clause that covers specific examples of obnoxiousness that he/she is concerned about - and put that "agreement" into a side letter, rather than the main contract. If it comes to it, then I would still have the agreement as to what obnoxiousness and annoyance actually means in that letter and you can always time limit this (say 20 years or death, which ever comes first) - potentially such a clause in the main contract devalues the land that you are purchasing....
As it stands at the moment annoyance could even cover going for planning permission for, say, building stables on the land....
I would have a chat with the seller and explain that your purpose is as you have said. However, if you were to sell on, you would include a clause that covers specific examples of obnoxiousness that he/she is concerned about - and put that "agreement" into a side letter, rather than the main contract. If it comes to it, then I would still have the agreement as to what obnoxiousness and annoyance actually means in that letter and you can always time limit this (say 20 years or death, which ever comes first) - potentially such a clause in the main contract devalues the land that you are purchasing....
As it stands at the moment annoyance could even cover going for planning permission for, say, building stables on the land....
wow DT you are on the ball! funnily enough they have put a declaration in the draft contract that we promise not to object to any future planning they may wish to apply for on their retained portion of land and in return they promise not to object to any planning application we may make in the future. to me this is contradictory to the 'annoyance' clause - as if we agree to the planning permission clause then technically they could put up a smelly pig barn next to our house and we could'nt complain, or we could apply for planning permission for a riding arena with full floodlights and they could'nt complain - anyway, Annoyance is the first thing to come out of the Contract, with a replacement word that is a little less subjective. We'll see what Mrs 150 pound an hour solicitor has to say about it this week. thanks for the replies
This will probably be a restrictive covenant the term nuisance & annoyance are often to be found in conveyancing documents, as is quiet enjoyment. Annoyance has no technical meaning but it may cause you problems when you own the land or if you decide to sell it at a later date, I suggest you try to have the covenant removed.
If you wish to upset yourself look up Davies v Dennis & Ors 2009, where a person wished to extend their property with a restrictive nuisance & annoyance covenant, think of the cost.
If you wish to upset yourself look up Davies v Dennis & Ors 2009, where a person wished to extend their property with a restrictive nuisance & annoyance covenant, think of the cost.
1 to 13 of 13
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.