Quality of life, construction activity and citizens’ rights

Construction activity constitutes a fundamental pillar of economic growth and urban development. In recent years, particularly in urban centres, the intensity and pace of development have significantly altered the built environment.

This growth does not always proceed without friction. Intense noise, vibrations and persistent disturbance, which frequently accompany construction works, directly affect the daily lives of citizens and raise the question of the limits of development.

The law does not treat development as a superior or unchecked right. On the contrary, it seeks to strike a balance between freedom of economic activity and the protection of fundamental rights, such as the right to the peaceful enjoyment of one’s home and respect for private and family life.

 Nuisance, and particularly excessive noise, has long been recognised as legally actionable conduct when it exceeds the limits of socially acceptable coexistence.

The concept of nuisance in common law

Under English common law, the tort of private nuisance concerns any substantial and unreasonable interference with another person’s enjoyment of land. Noise is a classic form of nuisance, especially when it is continuous and intense.

Case law has consistently emphasised that nuisance must always be assessed in light of the character of the area and the circumstances of each case.

It has also been established that the lawfulness or economic utility of an activity does not exclude liability where serious and persistent interference is caused to neighbouring residences.

The European dimension and Article 8 of the ECHR

Protection against excessive nuisance is further reinforced at the European level. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights safeguards the right to respect for private and family life and the home.

The European Court of Human Rights has held that serious environmental disturbances, including noise, may amount to a violation of this provision where they substantially affect an individual’s quality of life.

A central consideration is the need to maintain a fair balance between economic interests and the rights of citizens.

Practical application: what a citizen may seek from the courts

Theoretical protection acquires practical substance through recourse to the courts and applications for interim relief. In cases of serious and ongoing nuisance arising from construction works, affected neighbours may seek immediate judicial intervention, even prior to the final determination of the case.

The court may regulate the manner and timing of the works, taking into account the character of the area and the presence of sensitive sites, such as schools.

In a decision issued by the Nicosia District Court on December 19, 2025, the court granted an interim order, finding that the continuation of the construction works in question would cause serious and disproportionate nuisance to neighbouring residents.

It was established that the works generated intense noise, particularly during the operating hours of a nearby primary school.

The existence of a planning permit or the fact that works are carried out lawfully does not preclude the existence of nuisance.

The court emphasised that, although expert evidence may be helpful in cases involving allegations of noise, it is not a prerequisite for establishing nuisance. In such cases, the court examines whether the defendant’s use of the property is reasonable.

Where the interference with the claimant’s property is such as to amount to nuisance, despite the exercise of due care by the defendant, the use will be deemed unreasonable.

The legislator’s objective is to protect the reasonable use and enjoyment of immovable property, seeking to maintain a balance between competing rights: the right of the property owner to use their property as they see fit, and the neighbours’ right to the reasonable enjoyment of their own property.

By means of the interim order issued, the court directed that the contracting company and any other involved persons refrain from carrying out construction works that generate noise and disturbance during school operating hours.

This remedy constitutes a targeted restriction on the activity, rather than a general suspension of development.

Nuisance arising from construction activity is not merely a matter of personal inconvenience, but a substantive legal and social issue.

Development must proceed with due respect for quality of life, education and human dignity. Where disturbance exceeds tolerable limits, citizens possess legal remedies, and the courts have a duty to safeguard them.