Alyson King v. Advocate General for Scotland [2008] CSOH 166

Debate:- The pursuer breeds and rears horses and in 2000 purchased a property in south-west Scotland with the intention to operate stables there. In March 2001, the pursuer was aware of aircraft flying at low altitudes over the stables in an area where operational low flying was allowed. The pursuer estimates that there are around thirty incidents each month. In this action, the pursuer sought damages for the harm which she alleged has been caused to her, her horses and to her property by the low-flying aircraft. The pursuer's claim against the defender was based upon:- (1) nuisance; and (2) infringement of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights . The defender denied the claim and stressed that low level aircraft training was important in the defence of the country. At debate the specification of the pleadings was attacked:- (1) the pursuer did not offer to prove the altitude of the flights was below 250 feet and the conclusions for declarator could not be granted and the action should therefore be dismissed; (2) the wholesale incorporation of expert reports was challenged; (3) the specification of a number of heads of loss was challenged; and (4) the relevancy of condescendence four (the minimum separation distance is "the distance between the aircraft and the ground or buildings/trees") was challenged.