Home / Crime and Justice / Falcon Breeder Wins Appeal: £258k Damages Upheld
Falcon Breeder Wins Appeal: £258k Damages Upheld
1 Nov
Summary
- A falcon breeding business was awarded £258,500 in damages.
- Three falcons died due to noise and visual disturbances from neighbours.
- The appeal court upheld damages based on a duty of care in negligence.
A falcon breeding business in Cornwall has secured £258,500 in damages following a Court of Appeal ruling. The award, initially granted after three falcons died during the 2022 breeding season due to noise and visual disturbances from neighbouring construction work, was upheld. These disturbances stemmed from scaffolding work, barn building, and a broken-down digger.
While most judges believed the nuisance claim should not have succeeded, two of the three appellate judges found that the neighbours also had a duty of care in negligence. This dual finding allows businesses with sensitive operations to potentially recover damages, provided the neighbour was aware of the risks and could have reasonably prevented them.
The case involved Raptors of Penwith, a business breeding gyr and peregrine falcons. Disputes with their neighbours, Barnes Thomas and Upper Cot Estate, over issues like a septic tank and vehicle access escalated to the High Court, which heard extensive evidence.
The trial judge found that noise and visual threats posed by the neighbour's activities during the crucial breeding period of March to May were proven. Incidents included dropped scaffolding poles and vibrations from barn construction, which distressed the birds. A digger left for three days with its bucket raised also caused significant disturbance.
At the appeal, a key argument focused on whether the specialized use of land for falcon breeding could increase a neighbour's liability. One judge agreed it was a special use, meaning a digger's presence might not trouble an ordinary farm. However, a dissenting judge argued that for its rural setting, the use could be considered ordinary, especially as stock breeding is common.
The negligence claim ultimately preserved the damages award. Judges reasoned that the neighbour, aware of the risks for over a year, had a duty to take reasonable care, such as parking the digger elsewhere or timing construction differently. This ensured the business could recover compensation despite the complexities of nuisance law.
