Veolia Water Central Ltd v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority

Veolia Water Central Ltd v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority

The Claimant is entitled to a declaration that, where it gives notice to the Defendant of a minor leak (not remediable by tightening or adjustment) and intends to repair, and reasonably believes the Defendant will not act promptly and the Defendant fails to do so, it may effect repair or replacement as reasonably necessary to remedy the leak, even if the defect would not otherwise justify repair under s 57(3).

Parties
Claimant: Veolia Water Central Limited (formerly Three Valleys Water plc); Defendant: London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Supplementary Judgment on Form of Declaratory Relief
Outcome
Declaration granted in revised form as set out in the judgment.
Legal Topics
Water Hydrant Maintenance, Declaratory Relief, Statutory Duties Under Water Industry Act 1991
Public Utilities Law Administrative Law Water Hydrant Maintenance Declaratory Relief Statutory Duties Under Water Industry Act 1991

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veolia Water Central Limited (formerly Three Valleys Water plc)

Claimant

London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Supplementary Judgment on Form of Declaratory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper form of declaratory relief regarding minor leaks in fire hydrants under s 57(3) Water Industry Act 1991
  2. 2 Entitlement to effect repairs and recover costs in cases of minor leaks

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is entitled to a declaration that, where it gives notice to the Defendant of a minor leak (not remediable by tightening or adjustment) and intends to repair, and reasonably believes the Defendant will not act promptly and the Defendant fails to do so, it may effect repair or replacement as reasonably necessary to remedy the leak, even if the defect would not otherwise justify repair under s 57(3).

Court Disposition

Declaration granted in revised form as set out in the judgment.

Orders

  • Declaration in the terms specified in paragraph 9 of the supplementary judgment.
  • Parties to check wording for consistency; subject to amendment if required.