The plaintiff sought a declaration that he owned an ancient right of ferry over the Thames, and that th edefendant had disturbed it by setting up a new ferry a short diatnce downstream.
Held: The traffic for the new ferry was largely generated by the park opened to the public by the defendant, and therefore the custom of the new ferry service was largely derived from this new business, was new traffic, and was not a disturbance of the plaintiff’s ferry rights.
Lord Parker said: ‘A ferry may thus be regarded as a link between two highways on either side of the water, or as part of a continuous highway crossing the water’.
Judges:
Viscount Haldane, Lord Parker of Waddington, Lord Sumner, Lord Strathclyde, and
Lord Parmoor
Citations:
[1916] 1 AC 57
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Earl of Dysart v Hammerton and Co CA 1914
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport, Litigation Practice
Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.225325