Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
It is the purpose of this article to endeavour to define the contents of this seemingly new subject and to suggest how it might be presented as a course for a law degree, at either undergraduate or postgraduate level, in Universities and Polytechnic Law Schools in this country (with suitable adaptations for Scotland). Environmental law sounds new and it is certainly new in a Law School syllabus sense, but in reality it is as old as the common law itself. The mediaeval statutes that prohibited the planting of trees within 100 feet of the King's highway were designed to protect the passerby from the arrows of Robin Hood and his men as they passed through Sherwood Forest. William Shakespeare's father was fined in 1584 by the town council of Stratford for allowing a dung-heap to accumulate outside his house. James I had passed an ordinance against the burning of "sea coal" within a specified distance of his Palace at Westminster. So we must start with the common law, and that means primarily the law of nuisance. Smoke that may injure a potential plaintiffs health or that of the begonias in his garden may be made the subject of an injunction or give rise to an action for damages. Sundry noises, smell and smuts from a petrol depot that disturbed the peace at the plaintiff's home were the subject of successful nuisance proceedings in Halsey v. Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd .. ! The common law is perhaps most zealous in its protection of the property rights vested in private owners. Thus the water in the adjacent river or stream must not be polluted by the agency of some other person higher up the stream and the plaintiff is entitled to a flowof water passing his land in its natural state, unaffected by colour, smell, quality, or temperature, and undiminished in quantity: Young v. Bankier Distillery Co.,z But this does not apply to underground percolating water not flowing in a defined channel: Bradford v. Pickles. Air and water quality, freedom from unreasonable noise and objectionable substances placed on adjoining land, are therefore assured by the common law to the owner or occupier ofland. He is entitled to peaceful enjoyment of his property
J. F. Garner (Tue,) studied this question.