Accordingly, a notice requiring abatement of a nuisance served by a Health authority on a water undertaker, was not validly served, where it depended upon the estuary being a watercourse. There had been no obligation to consult with the undertaker before serving the notice. The notice was not invalid for failing to specify how the nuisance should be abated. A smoke nuisance can be established on the basis of the smell of smoke alone. It was not necessary to establish the presence of visible smoke.
Smoke primarily means visible smoke, but even in common parlance can include the smell.
The statutory definition included sot, ash, grit and gritty particles. The smell related to the detection of smoke which constituted the offence. The local authority served a noise nuisance abatement notice upon the respondents regarding their plant room. The notice required abatement and a non-repetition. The notice was not specific as to the works required to be undertaken.