Moore v British Waterways Board

Moore v British Waterways Board

No licence is required for bona fide navigation exclusively on tidal stretches of the Grand Union Canal not designated as river waterways; permanent mooring is not a riparian right nor conferred by the 1793 Act; section 8 notices are valid against vessels moored without lawful authority, but BWB breached legitimate expectations and, provisionally, Article 8 rights by failing to follow its own procedures in respect of live-aboards.

Parties
Claimant: Nigel Peter Moore; Defendant: British Waterways Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Section 8 notices are valid against vessels moored without lawful authority; BWB breached legitimate expectations and provisionally infringed Article 8 rights; further submissions required on relief and costs.
Legal Topics
Riparian Rights, Public Right of Navigation, Statutory Interpretation, Legitimate Expectation, Human Rights, Mooring Rights, Licensing of Vessels
Public Law Property Law Administrative Law Riparian Rights Public Right of Navigation Statutory Interpretation Legitimate Expectation Human Rights +2 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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Peter Moore

Claimant

British Waterways Board

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether British Waterways Board acted within its statutory powers in serving section 8 notices under the British Waterways Act 1983 on vessels moored at Ridgeway Dock, Grand Union Canal
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a right to moor vessels by virtue of riparian rights or statutory provisions
  3. 3 Whether the public right of navigation includes a right to moor

Ratio Decidendi

No licence is required for bona fide navigation exclusively on tidal stretches of the Grand Union Canal not designated as river waterways; permanent mooring is not a riparian right nor conferred by the 1793 Act; section 8 notices are valid against vessels moored without lawful authority, but BWB breached legitimate expectations and, provisionally, Article 8 rights by failing to follow its own procedures in respect of live-aboards.

Court Disposition

Section 8 notices are valid against vessels moored without lawful authority; BWB breached legitimate expectations and provisionally infringed Article 8 rights; further submissions required on relief and costs.

Orders

  • Further submissions to be filed on relief and costs regarding breach of legitimate expectations and Article 8 rights.
  • No further action required on breach of court undertaking, as it was inadvertent and explained.