The House was asked whether an owner of land had a right to sink a well upon his own premises, and thereby abstract the subterranean water percolating through his own soil, which would otherwise, by the natural force of gravity, have found its way into springs which fed the River Wandle, the flow of which the plaintiff in that action had enjoyed for upwards of sixty years.
Held: Lord Wensleydale said that: ‘it has been now settled that the rights to the enjoyment of a natural stream of water on the surface, ex jure naturae, belongs to the proprietor of the adjoining lands, as a natural incident to the right to the soil itself, and that he is entitled to the benefit of it, as he is to all the other natural advantages belonging to the land of which he is the owner. He has the right to have it come to him in its natural state, in flow, quantity, and quality, and to go from him without obstruction; . . the riparian owner on a navigable river, in addition to the right connected with navigation to which he is entitled as one of the public, retains his rights, as an ordinary riparian owner, underlying and controlled by, but not extinguished by, the public right of navigation.’
Judges:
Lord Wensleydale
Citations:
[1859] 7 HLC 349, [1859] EngR 894, (1859) 7 HLC 349, (1859) 11 ER 140
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Chasemore v Richards, Clerk To The Croydon Local Board Of Health Cexc 12-May-1857
The owner of a mill on the banks of a river cannot maintain an action against a land-owner, who sinks a deep well on his own land and by pumps and steam engine diverts the under-ground water which would otherwise have percolated the soil and flowed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.276469
