By the terms of a decreet-arbitral proceeding on a statutory submission between a railway company and the proprietor of lands taken for the construction of the railway, the company were taken bound to pay a certain sum as purchase-money, and to execute certain works, not including the drainage of the adjoining lands. In releasing the … Continue reading Great North of Scotland Railway Co v Duke of Fife: HL 12 Mar 1900
A railway passenger on a Friday afternoon took a first-class return ticket from A to P, the ticket having on its face ‘Saturday fare.’ The passenger noticing this, made inquires, and was informed by the company’s station-master at A that the ticket was available, according to the account of the latter, for all trains on … Continue reading Menzies v Highland Railway Coy: SCS 8 Jun 1878
The Act required the railway company to make gates and passages over the railway for the accommodation of the owners and occupiers of land adjoining the railway. The conveyance to the railway company reserved to the landowner and his successors in title a right of way over the level crossing that was made. Held: The … Continue reading Midland Railway Company v Gribble: CA 1895
Compulsory Purchase Damages limited to Actual Loss Rule (6) was designed to preserve the effect of the 19th Century case-law under the 1845 Act, by which personal loss caused by the compulsory acquisition was treated as part of the value to the owner of the land: ‘the owner in a proper case – that is, … Continue reading Horn v Sunderland Corporation: CA 1941
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
Land had been acquired by the trustees’ predecessors under the 1882 Act. The question was now whether it was subject to charitable trusts. Money having been received from the acquisition of the rights, a meeting had been held to determine the trusts upon which it was to be held. The express trusts were for the … Continue reading H M Attorney General v Hyde and others: ChD 5 Dec 2001
A special Act for waterworks gave power to ‘take or use’ any land for the construction of works, subject to compensation under the 1845 Act. The works involved the laying of pipes in the public road, and the claim was by the authority responsible for maintaining the highway. Held: Compensation was payable under section 68. … Continue reading Harpur v Mayor of Swansea: HL 1913
Compensation was awarded to the owner of a warehouse near Blackfriars because the construction of the Victoria Embankment cut off his access across the public highway to a dock on the river. Lord Cairns LC quoted Thesiger QC as saying: ‘Where by the construction of works there is a physical interference with any right, public … Continue reading Metropolitan Board of Works v McCarthy: HL 1874
The landowner claimed for injurious affection of the remainder of his land after part was acquired by compulsory purchase. Held: The claim for injurious affection was confined to the effects of works and uses on the land taken. Citations: [1964] 2 QB 134 Statutes: Land Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 63 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited … Continue reading Edwards v Minister of Transport: 1964
Where persons under disability are served with a notice, under the Lands Clauses Act, to take part of a house and premises, they are able to sell under the 92d section, and may require the company to take the whole house, and co, although it may not fall within the limits of deviation of the … Continue reading Governors of St Thomass Hospital v Charing Cross Railway Company: 6 Mar 1861
In 1861 the railway company used its statutory powers to buy some of Mr Blackmore’s land for railway purposes. In 1864 they had a dispute over their boundary. This was settled by an agreement that he should build a wall to be maintained at their joint expense. The agreement included a release of claims in … Continue reading London and South Western Railway Company v Blackmore: HL 5 Jul 1870
(Year?) A special Act incorporated the provisions of the 1845 Act other than those related to ‘the taking of land otherwise than by agreement’. Held: Section 68 was not incorporated, because it was one of a series of clauses headed ‘with respect to the taking of land otherwise than by agreement’. (1868-69) LR4 Ex 227 … Continue reading Ferrar v City Sewers Commissioners: 1868
The Board had power under the 1870 Act to acquire land to build school accommodation. The 1845 Act was to apply ‘with respect to the purchase of land’ for the purposes of the 1870 Act. The Board began to erect a school building on a site which they . .
Stirling J: ‘Now at law a contract for the sale of land creates merely a personal obligation between the vendor and purchaser and does not bind the land; in equity such a contract binds the land and that not only as against the vendor, but also as against all persons claiming under him with notice … Continue reading Mercer v Liverpool St Helens and South Lancashire Railway: 1903
Where a bridge has been constructed under the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 to carry a high road over a railway, and was originally constructed of adequate strength to carry the normal traffic of the time, is it sufficient for the railway company to maintain it of such strength, or must it provide a bridge … Continue reading Attorney General (on Relation of Pickfords Ltd) v Great Northern Railway Co: HL 21 Jul 1916
The North British Railway Act 1913, sec. 41, enacts – ‘And whereas lands have from time to time been purchased or acquired by the company, the Forth Bridge Railway Company, and by joint committees incorporated by Act of Parliament or Order on which the company may be represented, adjoining to or near to railways or … Continue reading North British Railway Co v Birrell: HL 17 Dec 1917
Superior and Vassal – Feucontract – Railway – Access – Railway Clauses Act 1845 (8 and 9 Vict. c. 33), sec. 6A railway company having obtained an Act enabling them to pass through certain lands, served a statutory notice to take part of a field which the proprietor was engaged in feuing. Before the notice … Continue reading Fleming v Newport Railway Co: HL 19 Mar 1883
The Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 provides, by section 51, as to roads crossing a railway by bridges, that where a bridge has been built to the original width of the road but not up to the maximum prescribed by the Act, when the road is subsequently widened the railway is bound to widen the … Continue reading Rhondda Urban District Council v Taff Yale Railway Co: HL 1 Apr 1909
Land had been purchased compulsorily, but the respondent unlawfully returned to possession in 1966, and now claimed title by adverse possession. The Council executed a vesting deed poll in 1988. The Council asserted that he could not be in adverse possession of his own land. Held: ‘anyone who has possession of land can maintain an … Continue reading Rhondda Cynon Taff Borough Council v Watkins: CA 12 Feb 2003
A jury summoned under The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, 8 and 9 Vict. e. 18, S. 68, to assess the compensation due to a claimant for lands, and co, injuriously affected by the works of a public Company, have no jurisdiction to determine whether the lands have been injuriously affected; their jurisdiction is limited … Continue reading Horrocks v The Metropolitan Railway Company: 4 Jul 1863
It is a question of fact, to be decided on the circumstances of the particular case, whether ‘freestone’ is a mineral falling within the exception contained in section 70 of the Railways Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act 1845. Judges: Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lord Atkinson, Lord Gorell, and Lord Shaw Citations: [1911] UKHL 49 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Caledonian Railway Co v Symington: HL 16 Nov 1911
A railway company, before applying for a Deviation Act, deposited with the clerk of the peace for the county, plans and sections of the proposed line, and cross sections shewing the manner in which roads were to be carried over the line. On one of those cross sections, No. 3, were delineated the manner in … Continue reading Regina v The Caledonian Railway Company: 20 Nov 1850
Under sect. 36 of The Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 and! 9 Vict. c. 16), a party who has recovered judgment against a company is not precluded from assuring execution aquarist the shareholders who have riot paid up for their shares, though lands of the company have been delivered on elegit, if the proceeds … Continue reading The Queen v The Derbyshire, Staffordshire And Worcestershire Junction Railway: 31 May 1854
A conveyance under section 77 of the 1845 Act does not pass the minerals beneath unless they are expressly included in that conveyance, i.e. otherwise they are retained by the vendor. A deed which gave accurate effect to a pre-existing opion could not be rectified to reflect what was claimed to be the true intention … Continue reading Thompson v Hickman: 1907
Citations: (1868) 3 Ch App 377 Statutes: Land Clauses (Consolidation) Act 1845 Cited by: Cited – Tiffany Investments Ltd and Another v Bircham and Co Nominees (No 2) Limited and others CA 4-Dec-2003 The tenancy was a long lease at a low rent under the 1954 Act, and so had continuing protection under the 1977 … Continue reading Carington v Wycombe Railway Co: 1868
Under the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845, section 78, a railway company is entitled to prevent the owner, lessee, or occupier of a mine or minerals, from working minerals under or near the railway, provided the company makes ‘compensation for such mine.’ An owner of land let the minerals to a coal company for a … Continue reading Eden and Others v North-Eastern Railway Co: HL 9 Jul 1907
Provisional Order – Harbour – Dock – Support – Working of Mines – Railways Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act 1845, secs. 70 to 78, Applied to Dock. Judges: Earl of Strathmore, Viscount Falkland, Chairman, Mr J.D. Hope, M.P., and Mr J. M’Callum, M.P. Citations: [1908] UKHL 1007, 45 SLR 1007 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: Scotland Transport, Land … Continue reading X North British Railway Order: HL 27 Jul 1908
A railway company in 1867 acquired a certain holding of land lying within the limits of their compulsory powers and took a conveyance substantially in the form prescribed by section 80 of the Lands Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act 1845 and Schedule A thereof, but they did not register the conveyance within sixty days of the … Continue reading Heriot’s Trust v Caledonian Railway Co: HL 25 Mar 1915
In a district where china clay was no part of the ordinary composition of the soil, and was only rarely and exceptionally present, a railway company had acquired lands by statutory procedure. Held that the china clay was included in the reservation to the landowner of ‘mines or other minerals’ under the Railways Clauses Consolidation … Continue reading Great Western Railway Co v Carpalla United China Clay Co Ltd: HL 16 Dec 1909
The Railways Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act 1845, sec. 70, enacts – ‘The company shall not be entitled to any mines of coal, ironstone, slate, or other minerals under any land purchased by them . . . and all such mines . . . shall be deemed to be excepted out of the conveyance of such … Continue reading North British Railway Co v Budhill Coal and Sandstone Co and Others: HL 15 Nov 1909
An authority serving a notice to treat no longer has a statutory power to acquire land in circumstances where the order under which the notice had been served was for the acquisition of land for specific purposes which the authority had abandoned. Accordingly, the notice to treat was no longer effective. As to the effect … Continue reading Grice and another v Dudley Corporation: ChD 1958
The fact that a railway has acquired land under sections 77-85 of the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 does not exclude the common law right to lateral support from strata outside the forty yards or other prescribed limit mentioned in the Act. Lord Chancellor (Viscount Haldane),the Earl of Halsbury, Lords Atkinson and Shaw [1913] UKHL … Continue reading Howley Park Coal and Cannel Co v London and North-Western Railway Co: HL 1 Nov 1913
By a memorandum not under seal, the plaintiff hired of the owner of land the sole and exclusive liberty of shooting arid fishing over it for three years. A portion of the land was (pending the term) sold to the defendants, who constructed a line of railway across it, to the great detriment of the … Continue reading Bird v The Great Eastern Railway Company: 13 Jun 1865
The claimants sought judicial review of a decision of the defendant harbour masters themselves to install and sell from the harbour all fule for use by boats using it, saying that they had no power to operate such an enterprise. Held: Whilst the sale of fuel would assist the town, it was not part of … Continue reading Looe Fuels Ltd., Regina (on the Application of) v Looe Harbour Commissioners: Admn 27 Apr 2007
The defendants (E) were liable to F after a serious offshore accident, but sought a contribution from a third party (A), the main charterers, seeking to rely on section 3(2) o the 1940 Act saying that ‘if sued they might have been liable’. The court was asked to interpret the section, saying whether this answer … Continue reading Farstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd: SC 5 May 2010
The owner of a house, none of whose lands have been taken for the purposes of the railway, cannot under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, or the Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, recover compensation in respect of injury to the house . .
