Pearson v Foster

Pearson v Foster

Dr Pearson has no right, express or implied, to operate or control any of the sluice gates at the Mill; Mrs Foster enjoys riparian and milling rights in respect of the artificial watercourse; fishing rights in the West Leat are not extinguished as restoration is possible; Dr Pearson’s fishing rights do not extend to the south-eastern corner or eastern half of the East Leat; Mrs Foster did not act wilfully or maliciously to interfere with Dr Pearson’s rights; no injunctive relief is appropriate for either party; the Land Registry register should be altered to correct the mistake regarding fishing rights in the south-eastern corner of the East Leat.

Parties
Claimant: Richard Eaton Pearson; Defendant: Lillie Eileen Julia Foster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; counterclaim for injunction refused; order for alteration of Land Registry register.
Legal Topics
Riparian Rights, Profits a Prendre, Easements, Artificial Watercourses, Fishing Rights, Land Registry Alteration, Milling Rights
Property Law Equity Land Registration Riparian Rights Profits a Prendre Easements Artificial Watercourses Fishing 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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Eaton Pearson

Claimant

Lillie Eileen Julia Foster

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Pearson is entitled to operate or control sluice gates at the Mill for fishing rights enjoyment
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Foster enjoys riparian and milling rights
  3. 3 Whether fishing rights have been extinguished as regards the West Leat

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Pearson has no right, express or implied, to operate or control any of the sluice gates at the Mill; Mrs Foster enjoys riparian and milling rights in respect of the artificial watercourse; fishing rights in the West Leat are not extinguished as restoration is possible; Dr Pearson’s fishing rights do not extend to the south-eastern corner or eastern half of the East Leat; Mrs Foster did not act wilfully or maliciously to interfere with Dr Pearson’s rights; no injunctive relief is appropriate for either party; the Land Registry register should be altered to correct the mistake regarding fishing rights in the south-eastern corner of the East Leat.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; counterclaim for injunction refused; order for alteration of Land Registry register.

Orders

  • No injunctive relief granted to either party.
  • Land Registry register to be altered to remove fishing rights from the eastern bank of the East Leat between the Mill building and the southern boundary of Maiden Newton House.