A railway company were taken bound by a clause in their Act in 1855 to ‘erect and maintain a temporary goods and passenger station’ at a point to be agreed on an estate which was to be intersected by their line of railway, on the narrative that the then proprietors of the estate had laid out a portion of it for feuing. The clause proceeded thus-‘At the said station all ordinary trains shall stop for the purpose of traffic;’ then came a proviso that if on the expiry of five years the traffic proved unremunerative the company should no longer be bound to maintain the said station, and that the question of the maintenance or abandonment of the station should be determined by arbitration.
A station was erected in accordance with the above enactment, and no proposal to abandon it was ever made.
In 1858 the same parties arrived at an agreement, which proceeded on a recital of the above clause, and provided that in consideration of certain prestations in favour of the railway company they should complete the station as a permanent station, and should thereafter maintain it in all time coming at their own expense.
Subsequently the estate was sold. In 1892 the then proprietor brought an action against the railway company to have it declared that they were bound to stop all ordinary trains, and in particular certain specified trains, at the said station on his estate.
Held ( rev. judgment of First Division) that all ordinary trains must stop at the station.
Judges:
Lord Chancellor (Herschell), and Lords Watson, Ashbourne, Morris, and Shand
Citations:
[1893] UKHL 947, 30 SLR 947
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Transport
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.633300