The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd

Private law claims in trespass or nuisance against a sewerage undertaker for unauthorised discharges in breach of foul water provisos are inconsistent with the statutory enforcement scheme under the Water Industry Act 1991 and are impliedly ousted, except in cases of negligence or deliberate wrongdoing. Contractual licences permitting discharge, if terminable, do not convert into permanent rights upon termination; the undertaker's rights cease in accordance with the licence terms unless other statutory defences apply.

Parties
Claimant/appellant/respondent: The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd; Defendant/respondent/claimant/appellant: United Utilities Water Ltd; Intervener: Good Law Project Limited; Intervener: Environmental Law Foundation; Intervener: London Waterkeeper; Intervener: Stonyhurst College; Intervener: Kent Environment and Community Network
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
2018 appeal dismissed; 2010 appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Statutory Duties of Sewerage Undertakers, Trespass, Nuisance, Ultra Vires, Enforcement of Statutory Duties, Water Industry Act 1991, Foul Water Provisos
Environmental Law Public Law Tort Law Statutory Interpretation Statutory Duties of Sewerage Undertakers Trespass Nuisance Ultra Vires +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd

Claimant/appellant/respondent

United Utilities Water Ltd

Defendant/respondent/claimant/appellant

Good Law Project Limited

Intervener

Environmental Law Foundation

Intervener

London Waterkeeper

Intervener

Stonyhurst College

Intervener

Kent Environment and Community Network

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether private law claims in trespass or nuisance can be brought against a sewerage undertaker for unauthorised discharges in breach of foul water provisos under Water Industry Act 1991
  2. 2 Whether contractual licences permitting discharge into canal can be terminated to prevent continued discharge by sewerage undertaker
  3. 3 Whether provisions for termination and reinstatement in drainage licences are void as ultra vires

Ratio Decidendi

Private law claims in trespass or nuisance against a sewerage undertaker for unauthorised discharges in breach of foul water provisos are inconsistent with the statutory enforcement scheme under the Water Industry Act 1991 and are impliedly ousted, except in cases of negligence or deliberate wrongdoing. Contractual licences permitting discharge, if terminable, do not convert into permanent rights upon termination; the undertaker's rights cease in accordance with the licence terms unless other statutory defences apply.

Court Disposition

2018 appeal dismissed; 2010 appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that MSCC may not bring an action in trespass or nuisance against UU for unauthorised discharges absent negligence or deliberate wrongdoing.
  • Declaration that termination provisions in drainage licences are valid; UU's implied statutory right to discharge does not survive termination of contractual licences.