What does not act as a complete defense to a nuisance claim?

Statutory compliance does not act as a complete defense to a nuisance claim because simply following the law or complying with regulations does not automatically shield a party from nuisance liability. Nuisance claims can be based on the unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of one’s property. Therefore, even if a party is in compliance with statutory requirements, they may still be held liable if their actions or activities result in substantial harm or annoyance to neighboring property owners. This principle recognizes that legal standards can sometimes be insufficient to address all forms of interference, especially when it comes to the subjective impact on the enjoyment of property.

In contrast, while lack of intent to cause harm, natural conditions causing interference, and minimal disruption may influence the outcome of a nuisance claim or contribute to a defense, they do not absolve responsibility in the same definitive manner as statutory compliance. Each of these factors can be weighed by a court to determine whether the interference is unreasonable and thus may not entirely exempt the defendant from liability.