The defendants owned land adjacent to that of the plaintiff’s. Both plots were buillt over a deep substratum of wet sand, known as ‘running silt’. The defendants, in order to continue a development, drained the running silt under their own land, but this in turn led to subsidence in the plaintiff’s land as the silt collapsed. By statute the defendant was protected from liability in nuisance.
Held: The withdrawal of the support by draining the silt was a nuisance actionable at law, and the Act did not protect the defendant in these circumstances.
Citations:
[1899] 2 Ch 217
Statutes:
Nuisance, Utilities
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.463638
