Arscott & Ors v The Coal Authority & Anor

Arscott & Ors v The Coal Authority & Anor

The appeal was dismissed because the common enemy rule applied to the facts, the infilling of Grove Fields was not a reasonably foreseeable cause of the flooding to the appellants’ properties, and the Human Rights Act and ECHR did not require modification of the rule or impose liability in this case.

Parties
Appellant: Arscott & ors; 1st Respondent: The Coal Authority; 2nd Respondent: Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen’s Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Flooding, Common Enemy Rule, Reasonable Foreseeability, Human Rights Act, Article 8 ECHR, Article 1 First Protocol ECHR
Tort Law Nuisance Property Law Flooding Common Enemy Rule Reasonable Foreseeability Human Rights Act Article 8 ECHR +1 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arscott & ors

Appellant

The Coal Authority

1st Respondent

Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen’s Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the common enemy rule applies to the facts of the case
  2. 2 Whether the infilling of Grove Fields was a reasonably foreseeable cause of flooding to the appellants’ properties
  3. 3 Whether the common enemy rule should be modified in light of the Human Rights Act and ECHR obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the common enemy rule applied to the facts, the infilling of Grove Fields was not a reasonably foreseeable cause of the flooding to the appellants’ properties, and the Human Rights Act and ECHR did not require modification of the rule or impose liability in this case.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant to pay Respondents’ costs of the appeal on the standard basis, such costs to be assessed if not agreed