Baines v Baker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 December 1752 |
| Date | 18 December 1752 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 27 E.R. 105
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Vernon v. Vestry of St. James, 1880, 16 Ch. D. 470; Metropolitan Asylum District v. Hill, 1881, 6 App. Cas. 206; Cooper Essex v. Local Board for Acton, 1889, 14 App. Cas. 161; Att-Gen. v. Manchester Corporation, [1893] 2 Ch. 87.
Case 78.-baines against baker. Dec. 18, 1752S [See Vernon v. Vestry of St. James, 1880, 16 Ch. D. 470; Metropolitan Asylum District v. Hill, 1881, 6 App. Cas. 206 ; Cooper Essex v. Local Board for Acton, 1889, 14 App. Cas. 161 ; Att.-Gen. v. Manchester Corporation, [1893] 2 Ch. 87.] , Injunction refused to stay building Inoculation Hospital in Cold Bath Fields.-[S. C. Anon. 3 Atk. 750.] Bill for an injunction to stay building an hospital for people infected with the smallpox ia.'Cold Bath Fields, very near the houses of several tenants of the plaintiff. And it was this day moved for an injunction; andathe infectiousness of the distemper, the terror it occasioned in the neighbourhood, was insisted on; also, that the lessee for years, under whom the defendants claim, hold the estate of the plaintiff, and in the C, m- 4* 106 BAINES V. BAKER AMB. 159. lease is an express covenant against the house being turned to a brewhouse, which would annoy the neighbour-[159]-hood. It was said an affidavit was filed, that several tenants of plaintiff had given him notice to quit, but Lord Chancellor did not let it be read, but took it up upon hearing the counsel for the motion. 2 Ro. Abr. 139, 140; 1 Lut. 69, Hawk. PI. C. 75, s. 11, were cited. Lord Chancellor. I cannot make any order in this matter. Am of opinion it is a charity like to prove of great advantage to mankind; such an hospital must not be far from a town, because those that are attacked with that disorder in a natural way, may not be in a condition to be carried far. Two things are to be considered : First, Whether it is a nuisance at common law ? Secondly, If it is, Whether a public or a private nuisance 1 As to the covenant in the lease, there is no foundation for the motion on that, for it is not a general covenant against all nuisances, but particularly against a brewhouse. It comes to the general question. Gases are as cited. There was lately an indictment at the Summer Assizes 1750 in Sussex, against Frewen, for such an hospital. Defendant was acquitted; cannot call this a private nuisance; if any, it is a public one; the former is to one person only; as building against lights; nuisance ad...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michael John Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd
...and following upon the individual immediately from the obstruction”. 151 Spencer, above n 141, at 67. See Baines v Baker (1752) 3 Atk 750, 27 ER 105 (Ch) at 152 Baines, above n 151, at 106. See also Spencer, above n 141, at 67. 153 William Blackstone Commentaries on the Laws of England: Boo......
-
Michael John Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Limited
...and following upon the individual immediately from the obstruction”. Spencer, above n 141, at 67. See Baines v Baker (1752) 3 Atk 750, 27 ER 105 (Ch) at Baines, above n 151, at 106. See also Spencer, above n 141, at 67. Attorney-General as the public representative was historically justifie......
-
Attorney General at the Relation of William Izard, Informant; James Brown, John Hall, and forty-six others, Defendants
...that this Court may administer equitable relief where the subject-matter is criminal : as in the instance of nuisances. Baines v. Baker (Amb. 158 ; 3 Atk. 750), Coulson v. White (3 Atk. 21), Ryder v. Bentham (1 Ves. Sen. 543), Attorney-General v. Doughty (2 Ves. Sen. 453), Mayor, dec., of L......
-
Hole v Barlow
...it to other purposes; for that such trades ought not to be in the principal parts of the city, but in the outskirts." In Baines v. Barker, Ambler, 158, 3 Atkyns, 750, Lord (a) This can hardly be correctly expressed; for, no man can be said to make a reasonable use of his own rights, if that......