• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Fireworks, livestock, and liability: what risks and duties do farmers and event organisers need to be aware of?

Bonfire Night brings a predictable spike in fireworks near farmland. Sudden noise, flashes and debris can startle animals, trigger flight responses and lead to injuries, escapes, and property damage. When harm occurs, responsibility and cost can fall on event organisers, neighbouring landowners, and farmers themselves. As event organisers finalise their plans for half term events and Bonfire Night celebrations, this week’s edition of Field Notes outlines key liabilities, the standard of reasonable care expected, how the Animals Act 1971 can apply, mitigating the risk of committing offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, and practical steps for farmers and event organisers to help reduce risk/protect your position if something goes wrong.

Negligence: the duty to take reasonable care

Both farmers and those staging fireworks displays owe a duty to take reasonable care to avoid causing foreseeable harm. With livestock, distress during fireworks is foreseeable in early November. The legal question is not whether those involve have achieved a perfect outcome but whether reasonable steps were taken in the circumstances, considering the magnitude of the risk, the likelihood of harm, the practicality of precautions, and industry practice.

For event organisers, the focus is on site selection, display design and timing, contractor competence, crowd and perimeter management, and communication with neighbours likely to be affected. For farmers, the focus turns to pre‑event planning, animal husbandry adjustments, field and yard security, and real‑time monitoring. Where both parties take sensible precautions, liability risk reduces materially; where precautions are inadequate, liability risk increases.

Private nuisance: unreasonable interference with land

Fireworks can give rise to claims in private nuisance where noise, smoke, debris, or shockwaves cause an unreasonable interference with neighbouring land use, or where they trigger livestock flight with knock‑on losses. Reasonableness is fact‑sensitive. Factors include the character of the location, the frequency and duration of the interference, compliance with guidance or byelaws, and whether the organiser took steps to mitigate risk. A one‑off, well‑managed display is less likely to be actionable; repeated late‑night disturbances or high‑impact displays near sensitive agricultural operations will increase exposure.

For farmers facing nuisance from nearby displays, contemporaneous logs of impacts on livestock and operations, with photographs and vet notes where relevant, will be valuable both in seeking early resolution and, if needed, in quantifying loss.

Animals Act 1971: strict liability exposures

The Animals Act 1971 can impose liability on keepers of animals for damage caused by those animals in certain circumstances. Livestock that escape when startled and cause damage on a highway or neighbouring property may engage strict liability if the statutory conditions are met. Separately, negligence claims can arise where fencing or gates were inadequate given foreseeable fireworks activity.

For fireworks organisers, the Act does not directly attach to them as “keepers,” but their negligence can still be a legal cause of the chain of events if the display foreseeably precipitated flight and escape. Reasonableness in siting, notice to neighbours, and control of debris fall‑out zones is therefore important not only for nuisance but to avoid causing losses “downstream” – or more accurately, downwind.

Animal Welfare Act 2006: unnecessary suffering

It is an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to domestic or “captive” animals – including livestock and horses. Misuse of fireworks – or failure by event organisers to avoid or reduce the impact on animals – can result in the commission of the offence of causing unnecessary suffering under section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Farmers or other owners of animals who “permit” or fail to take reasonable steps to prevent action or inaction by someone else (such as an event organiser) that causes unnecessary suffering can themselves be guilty of the same offence.

“Reasonable steps” in practice: what good looks like

The benchmark is not perfection, but a demonstrably thoughtful and proportionate approach. On the organiser side, this typically includes selecting a site with adequate separation from livestock fields and buildings; consulting a competent, insured pyrotechnics contractor; giving early written notice to neighbouring farms with intended dates and times; choosing lower‑noise fireworks where practicable; avoiding late‑night finales; monitoring wind direction to prevent debris drift; and putting in place a stop‑procedure if conditions deteriorate.

On the farmer side, reasonable steps usually include advance neighbour liaison; reviewing planned displays within a set radius; moving particularly flighty or periparturient animals to more secure or distant enclosures; checking and, if necessary, strengthening fencing and gates along highways and sensitive boundaries; removing hazards within handling areas; scheduling feeding to calm stock before dusk; ensuring staff availability to monitor herds during and after displays; and documenting everything done before, during and after the risk period. Simple measures, such as leaving yard lights on to reduce contrast and providing shelter, can make a real difference and are easy to evidence.

Alternative displays

In addition to lower-noise fireworks some event organisers are now using options such as laser shows or drone displays. Often seen as safer and more eco-friendly, featuring reusable technology, avoiding noise pollution and debris, laser shows, and drone displays are far quieter and can – in appropriate locations – be set to music and can reduce the risks of animal distress and property damage. Drones or lasers tend to have a much higher upfront cost but can be quite cost effective over time – and can provide some highly creative visual displays.  My first experience of a drone show was the opening show for Glastonbury festival in 2024, with over 500 drones flying over the Pyramid Field, featuring some impressive aerial replication of festival artwork.

Liability pathways if livestock escape or are injured

If livestock injure themselves or others after they have been startled by fireworks, liability can arise through multiple routes. A farmer may face strict liability under the Animals Act in defined scenarios, or negligence if containment was objectively inadequate considering the known fireworks risk. An organiser may be liable in negligence or nuisance if the display was unreasonably sited or managed, or if the organiser fails to warn the neighbours so reasonable mitigations can’t be adopted. Where both parties were at fault, liability can be apportioned. Insurance coverage will depend on policy wording; both parties should ensure that public liability and, for farmers, livestock cover are in place and that any notification conditions are followed promptly.

Evidence and defensibility

Courts and insurers place significant weight on contemporaneous records. Short, dated notes of the risk assessment, neighbour notifications, fencing checks, contractor competence, and livestock monitoring will strengthen either party’s position. If an incident occurs, immediate photographs, vet reports, GPS‑stamped images of debris, and witness statements will help establish causation, quantum and the reasonableness of precautions. Early communication between neighbours can avoid escalation and, if necessary, support pragmatic loss sharing.

Bottom line

Fireworks near farmland create a foreseeable, manageable risk. Organisers and farmers who plan early, communicate clearly, and adopt proportionate precautions are far less likely to face successful claims. If the worst happens, prompt insurer notification and robust evidence capture are essential to protect positions on both liability and coverage. 

We’ll shortly be releasing a handy checklist, which lists steps for farms and estates to take before, during and after a display as well as guidance on what to do if there is an incident – keep an eye out for the checklist, or feel free to contact Maddie Dunn who would be happy to email you a printable PDF version.

Our thinking

  • LIIARC Tax Investigations Uncovered: Legal Tactics, Courtroom Trends & Strategic Remedies

    Caroline Greenwell

    Events

  • Good Divorce Week 2025: Believe it or not, there is a better way

    Emily Borrowdale

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys further bolsters its Corporate team with the appointment of Ed Morgan

    David Collins

    News

  • Autumn Budget 2025: Sifting the Rumours on Tax Rises and Reforms

    Charlotte Inglis

    Quick Reads

  • Adjudication under the Construction Act – a case on the residential occupier exception and contesting the validity of a payless notice

    Tegan Johnson

    Insights

  • VAT on Developer’s Biodiversity net gain (BNG) costs

    Elizabeth Hughes

    Insights

  • Princes’ float: a welcome listing, but the price says confidence is still scarce

    Iwan Thomas

    Quick Reads

  • Understanding the Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025: The Living Sector

    David Savage

    Insights

  • Law Middle East quotes Thomas Snider and Dalal Alhouti on the UAE’s rise into the top five seats of arbitration in the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Court of Arbitration

    Thomas R. Snider

    In the Press

  • Cross-border estates and the new “non-dom” regime: UK IHT reporting on death

    Harriet Betteridge

    Insights

  • James Broadhurst writes for Family Office Magazine on the attractiveness of hotels as an asset class

    James Broadhurst

    In the Press

  • Construction News quotes David Savage on the latest round of administration statistics in the construction sector

    David Savage

    In the Press

  • What role can construction lawyers play in helping UK construction sector clients achieve greater success and how?

    David Savage

    Insights

  • Harriet Betteridge writes for Tax Adviser on pensions and inheritance tax

    Harriet Betteridge

    In the Press

  • Disputes Over Donuts: Mediation - An International Perspective

    Tamasin Perkins

    Podcasts

  • In-Depth Virtual Currency Regulation

    Sara Sheffield

    Insights

  • The Pathfinder Pilot in practice – putting children back at the very heart of the Children Act

    Sarah Anticoni

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys further expands Intellectual Property offering with new Partner hire in London

    Stewart Hey

    News

  • Amendments to the Non-Contentious Probate Rules in force from today

    Jessie Davies

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys expands Corporate Tax and Incentives team with the appointment of Vadim Romanoff

    David Collins

    News

Back to top