The court explained the Act: ‘The canal having been made under the provisions of an Act of Parliament, the rights of the plaintiffs are derived entirely from that Act. This, like many other cases, is a bargain between a company of adventurers and the public, the terms of which are expressed in the statute; and … Continue reading Proprietors of the Stourbridge Canal v Wheeley: 1831
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The issue was whether the rights given under the section could only be exercised by owners of land on either side of the canal. Held: The Act took rights over land and was to be construed in the case of any ambiguity against its proposers. Section 79 was a proviso intended to protect the rights … Continue reading Swan Hill Developments Limited, Lloyd-Thomas etc v British Waterways Board: CA 25 Feb 1997
LRA Application for first registration of land and waterway at Brentford Dock – claim by Respondents that ownership of canal by Applicant did not extend to its full width – true construction of relevant legislation – Grand Junction Canal Act 1793, ss. 1, 4, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 18, 25, 27, 28 – Transport … Continue reading British Waterways Board v James Mason, David Devere ( Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore): LRA 29 Mar 2010
The claimant said that the defendant did not have the powers it claimed in serving notices requiring him to remove boats from a section of the Grand Union Canal. Held: The respondent did have the power under section 8 of the 1983 Act. As a riparian owner, but having no interest in the bed of … Continue reading Moore v British Waterways Board: ChD 10 Feb 2012
The claimant sought the right to moor his houseboats on the Grand Union Canal, a waterway regulated by the defendant who issued licences. The claimant said that rights granted under the 1793 Act survived the new scheme. The defendant said that a public right to navigation would not include a mooring right. The claimant said … Continue reading Moore v British Waterways Board: CA 5 Feb 2010
