Chester 01244 405555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Manchester 0844 800 8346

Pall Mall Court
61-67 King Street
Manchester M2 4PD

Send us a message
Our Offices

The lack of a common-law right does not make a deed unlawful

8th July, 2013

A person who owns a property where there is a watercourse within or adjacent to the boundaries of their property is a riparian owner.

In Moore v British Waterways Board [2013] EWCA Civ 73, the Court of Appeal held that the British Waterways Board (BWB) had no right to demand the removal of vessels moored to part of the canal bank adjacent to a riparian owner’s land.

For background, the BWB sought the removal of vessels moored at a tidal section of the Grand Union Canal adjacent to a riparian owner’s land. BWB relied upon s8 of the British Waterways Act 1983 (“the Act”) which at the time authorised the BWB to remove any vessel moored unlawfully without its authority.

The riparian owner claimed that riparian ownership had created a common-law right to moor permanently.

The case proceeded to trial and the High Court decided that the riparian owner did not have a right to moor vessels alongside his land except for the purpose of temporary access to his land.

The riparian owner appealed the High Court’s decision and the Court of Appeal found in his favour, deciding that the High Court had been influenced by the riparian owner’s claim to have a riparian right to moor vessels when it should have concentrated on the question of whether the riparian owner had moored the vessels unlawfully.

Whilst the presence of vessels at a permanent mooring is not unlawful, the Court of Appeal did agree with the High Court’s ruling that a riparian owner had no entitlement, simply by reason of that riparian ownership, to moor a vessel alongside their riparian land.

This decision highlights the fact that notices served under s8 of the Act must only be used where the vessels in question are moored unlawfully. Where the owner of the vessel is doing nothing wrong in mooring his vessel alongside his part of the bank, then he has acted within the law.

For more information on this or any other property dispute matter please contact Elizabeth Corcoran on 01244 405560 or email [email protected]

 

You might also be interested in...

Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance: Run-off and alternative regulators

18th July, 2018

Special Focus: Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance Run-off – it dominates the thoughts of sole practitioners and partners in smaller law firms in my experience and restricts the ambitions of firms. The SRA could help law firms by relaxing their rules on run-off cover on their Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance to help firms merge or close more easily. This would protect... Read More »

Senior employment lawyer joins Theatr Clwyd board

17th July, 2018

Helen Watson, Head of Employment Law at Aaron & Partners LLP, has taken up an invitation to become a Trustee of both the Trust Board and the Main Board Theatr Clwyd has bolstered its senior leadership team with the appointment of an experienced employment law solicitor to support its vision of being at the forefront of theatre making... Read More »

Why there is more to CSR than just boosting a company’s ego

6th July, 2018

When a business invests in its community it deserves praise – but it must go beyond that, writes Helen Watson, a trustee at Claire House and partner at Aaron and Partners Solicitors. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the link between a company and the community in which it operates. As a trustee on charity boards including Claire House... Read More »

Contact Us