Disputes involving agricultural land will typically centre on a practical problem, with the affected parties not necessarily framing it with legal terminology. These issues could include slurry escaping onto neighbouring land, pesticide drift damaging crops, blocked ditches causing flooding, or odour and noise affecting nearby property.
These issues may amount to a private nuisance, which is defined as an unreasonable interference with another person’s use or enjoyment of land. The principle is well established in cases such as Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1997] AC 655 and Coventry v Lawrence [2014] UKSC 13.
In some cases, a separate but related principle may also be relevant. In Rylands v Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330, the court recognised that liability may arise where a person brings onto land something likely to cause damage if it escapes and it does escape, causing foreseeable harm. More recent cases have refined and limited this principle, confirming that this case will only apply in exceptional escape cases.
For most landowners, the immediate challenge will likely not be identifying the problem. Proving what caused it, when it happened and who was responsible may be the real challenge.
That is where pre-action disclosure can be important. This is a process by which the court can order key documents to be disclosed by a potential defendant, under CPR 31.16, before proceedings are issued.
For an application to be successful, the applicant must show that:
- The parties are likely to be involved in later proceedings
- The documents requested ordinarily have to be disclosed if proceedings had already started and
- Early disclosure would help resolve the dispute fairly, save costs, or avoid unnecessary litigation.
This is important for an agricultural nuisance claim because the crucial evidence is often held by the other side. For example:
- Drainage plans
- Inspection records
- Slurry storage logs
- Pesticide application records
- Environmental reports
- Repair histories
Without those documents, a claimant may suspect the source of the problem but struggle to establish a viable case.
Pre-action disclosure is not an automatic right. Instead, the purpose is more practical and is designed to help the parties understand the facts early, assess whether a claim can properly be brought and potentially avoid unnecessary litigation. The court will not order disclosure simply to allow a party to go searching for a claim, as any request must be focused and justified, rather than a ‘fishing expedition’.
Used properly, pre-action disclosure can turn suspicion into evidence and place agricultural land disputes on a clearer footing from the outset.
Our specialist team can support you with compliance awareness so that you do not get caught out. Contact Natalie Dean today for help.