Moore v British Waterways Board [2013] EWCA Civ 73 (14 February 2013)

Moore v British Waterways Board [2013] EWCA Civ 73 (14 February 2013)

On the agreed facts, the appellant was not committing any legal wrong by mooring his vessels alongside the canal bank in his possession or occupation, and the absence of a positive common law right to moor permanently does not render the mooring unlawful. Therefore, the British Waterways Board had no statutory power under s.8 of the British Waterways Act 1983 to require removal of the vessels, as their presence was not 'without lawful authority'.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 73
Parties
Appellant: Nigel Moore; Respondent: British Waterways Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Riparian Rights, Mooring Rights, Statutory Interpretation, Public Right of Navigation, Trespass, Legitimate Expectation
Property Law Public Law Administrative Law Riparian Rights Mooring Rights Statutory Interpretation Public Right of Navigation Trespass +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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Moore

Appellant

British Waterways Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a riparian owner has a common law right to permanently moor vessels alongside riparian land without statutory authority or permission from the navigation authority
  2. 2 Whether the British Waterways Board had statutory power under s.8 of the British Waterways Act 1983 to require removal of vessels moored without its permission
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a positive right to moor permanently equates to unlawful mooring

Ratio Decidendi

On the agreed facts, the appellant was not committing any legal wrong by mooring his vessels alongside the canal bank in his possession or occupation, and the absence of a positive common law right to moor permanently does not render the mooring unlawful. Therefore, the British Waterways Board had no statutory power under s.8 of the British Waterways Act 1983 to require removal of the vessels, as their presence was not 'without lawful authority'.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Section 8 notices served by British Waterways Board declared invalid as against the appellant on the facts of this case.
  • No order requiring removal of the appellant's vessels from the relevant stretch of the Grand Union Canal.