EPA 1990 "Local authority environmental health services have a duty to „inspect‟ their districts from time to time for statutory nuisances. Additionally they have a duty, wherever reasonably practicable, to investigate any complaint about alleged odour nuisance made by a member of the public/resident. Section 79(1) states: „…and it shall be the duty of every local authority to cause its area to be inspected from time to time to detect any statutory nuisances which ought to be dealt with under Section 80 below and, where a complaint of a statutory nuisance is made to it by a person living within its area, to take such steps as are reasonably practicable to investigate the complaint‟. 3.6. Use of the Abatement Notice Procedure under Section 80 EPA 1990 Once a local authority has formed the view that a statutory nuisance exists, the local authority is under a duty to serve an abatement notice.23 Section 80(1) EPA 1990 provides that: „Where a local authority is satisfied that a statutory nuisance exists, or is likely to occur or recur in the area of the authority, the local authority shall serve a notice….‟ Service of the Abatement Notice There is no authority for the view that the service of an abatement notice should be delayed to allow sufficient time for alternative solutions to be explored: the trigger is the decision that the odour problem amounts to a statutory nuisance.26 Any significant delay after the decision has been made that a statutory nuisance exists or could occur or recur would effectively give the local authority a discretion to which it is not entitled and be in conflict with Ex parte Shelley.27 A certain amount of time would be allowed to consult with the perpetrator of the alleged nuisance, but EHPs need to be careful to avoid long drawn out discussions. In Ex parte South West Water, Simon Brown LJ opined28: „Often, certainly, it will be appropriate to consult the alleged perpetrator, at least on some aspect of the matter, before serving an abatement notice, but the enforcing authority should be wary of being drawn too deeply and lengthily into scientific or technical debate, and warier still of finding itself fixed with all the obligations of a formal consultation process.‟ It may be that the authority needs to consult in order to determine the initial question of whether a statutory nuisance exists; it might need to consult to decide whether to specify works in the abatement notice (and, if so, what works) or to determine the length of time to be given for those works to be undertaken. All of the above would be reasonable grounds must be justified and must be proportional. An indefinite delay or a delay without having in mind a clear purpose cannot be justified."

Entire Thread

Topic	Date Posted	Posted By
TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	01/10/14 09:05:00	Don Tanswell
Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	01/10/14 09:45:00	Will Watson
Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	01/10/14 17:54:00	David Turner
Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	01/10/14 23:09:00	Steve Taylor
Re:Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	02/10/14 14:29:00	Will Watson
Re:Re:Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	02/10/14 18:38:00	Andrew Steed
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	03/10/14 08:01:00	Steve Taylor
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	03/10/14 19:14:00	Steve Taylor
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:TODAY THAMES WATER ANTI POLLUTION PROTEST – RUGBY RD SCOUT HUT	04/10/14 13:27:00	Steve Taylor

Forum Home