The defendants installed an extractor fan on their property which protruded through the side of the wall into the claimant’s rear garden. The claimant commenced legal proceedings arguing that the extractor fan trespassed into her garden and that it also constituted a nuisance. The claimant sought an injunction requiring the defendants to remove or reposition the extractor fan as well as damages.

The defendants contested these claims on a number of grounds including that the claimant’s father helped to install the fan and that he gave his consent to their use on two occasions.

The judge at first instance dismissed all the claims for trespass and nuisance.

The claimant appealed on the basis that the judge at first instance had misdirected himself into believing that in order to establish a trespass the claimant had to prove substantial interference with the use of the land and that the trespass would have to interfere with any normal activity in the garden.