Case Summary

Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1997] AC 655

Tort; Negligence; harm, deposit of dust; principle of 'de minimis not curat lex'.

Facts: The construction of a road caused significant amounts of dust to be deposited in nearby houses. The residents sued the construction company for what they claimed was damage to their property due to the dust.

Issue: Did causing deposits of dust create liability in Negligence?

Decision: Deposits of dust can create liability in Negligence only if the dust is excessive and causes physical damage.

Reason: The English Court of Appeal said (at 676):

"...the deposit of dust is capable of giving rise to an action in negligence. Whether it does depends on proof of physical damage... Dust is an inevitable incident of urban life and the claim arises on the assumption that the defendants have caused 'excessive' deposits. Reasonable conduct and a reasonable amount of cleaning to limit the ill effects of dust can be expected of householders. Subject to that, if, for example, in ordinary use the excessive deposit is trodden into the fabric of a carpet by householders in such a way as to lessen the value of the fabric, an action would lie... The damage is in the physical change which renders the article less useful or less valuable...rather than any general concept of loss of utility...."