The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ld United Utilities Water Ltd

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ld United Utilities Water Ltd

The present claim is barred by cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, and is an abuse of process under the Henderson v Henderson principle, as the same parties and subject matter were litigated in the 2010 Claim, culminating in the Supreme Court decision which is determinative. The proposed amendment based on...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited; Defendant: United Utilities Water Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/statutory Trespass) / High Court Judgment on Strike Out and Amendment Applications
Outcome
Claim struck out; amendment refused
Legal Topics
Trespass, Statutory Rights of Discharge, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Henderson V Henderson Abuse of Process, Water Industry Act 1991, Section 186 Consent, Sewerage Undertaker Powers
Property Law Statutory Interpretation Water Law Civil Procedure Trespass Statutory Rights of Discharge Res Judicata Issue Estoppel +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited

Claimant

United Utilities Water Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/statutory Trespass) / High Court Judgment on Strike Out and Amendment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for trespass based on discharge from Outfall 61 is barred by cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, or abuse of process (Henderson v Henderson)
  2. 2 Whether the Supreme Court decision ([2014] UKSC 40) is determinative of the right to discharge via Old Outfalls regardless of the origin of the waste water
  3. 3 Whether the claimant can amend to add a claim based on section 186 of the Water Industry Act 1991 requiring consent for discharge

Ratio Decidendi

The present claim is barred by cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, and is an abuse of process under the Henderson v Henderson principle, as the same parties and subject matter were litigated in the 2010 Claim, culminating in the Supreme Court decision which is determinative. The proposed amendment based on section 186 of the Water Industry Act 1991 is also barred and, in any event, is unparticularised and unsupported by evidence. The claim and amendment are struck out.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; amendment refused

Orders

  • The present claim is struck out as barred by cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, and as an abuse of process.
  • The application to amend the claim form to add a ground based on section 186 of the Water Industry Act 1991 is refused.