An owner of land has the right to an unfettered use and enjoyment of his or her land and is protected by several real property (land) laws. One example is the law of nuisance which has evolved on a case by case basis (the common law) for over a century. The rule often applies to damage caused to land and other property by the escape of something from a neighbour’s lands. Common situations are odours, smoke, fumes, and herbicides escaping from adjoining lands in such a way that they affect the use and enjoyment of neighbouring lands. Noise may also constitute a nuisance.
What about the view from your property in the pristine landscape of Haliburton? You live on rural property and have a pleasant view of a stream meandering through your neighbour’s property. Your neighbour constructs a two car garage and shop blocking your view of the stream. What can you do? The law in Ontario is clear that a loss of enjoyment of a view does not constitute a nuisance by the neighbour. One leading author on the topic described in this way: “By way of contrast, although a plaintiff has been held to be entitled to clean air, free of odours, smoke, gases, and peace and quiet, he is not entitled, at least so far as the law of nuisance is concerned, to enjoy a pleasant or attractive view. If the defendant’s conduct produces an eyesore that is visible to the plaintiff, the latter cannot claim the protection of the law of nuisance. A defendant, it seems, can make his property as ugly as he chooses, and he will remain immune from liability under the common law.” But, perhaps, a township bylaw may apply.
It is not uncommon to buy rural property in southern Ontario and years later the province builds a highway through the farm fields you are looking at. The government has been sued for such an intrusion on a person’s aesthetic view. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada but without success. Here is what the court said: “I agree with the Court of Appeal that what the appellants complain of here is the loss of prospect or the loss of view. There are as well the elements of loss of privacy, but in essence the complaint is that once they dwelt in a rural setting with a pleasing prospect and now they are confronted on one side of their land at least with a modern highway. It is a claim for loss of amenities. That the use of the highway will constitute a disruptive element is probably true but that is a field of damage which may not be considered.”