Hole v Chard Union
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Year | 1894 |
| Date | 1894 |
Practice - Damages - Assessment down to Time of Assessment - Continuing Cause of Action - Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order XXXVI., r. 58.
“A continuing cause of action,” within the meaning of Order XXXVI., rule 58, is a cause of action arising from the repetition of acts or omissions similar to those in respect of which the action is brought.
The Plaintiffs brought an action against the Defendants for permitting sewage to fall into and pollute a stream running through the Plaintiffs' land, and obtained judgment for a perpetual injunction and for damages. The Defendants continued to pollute the stream, and three years after the judgment the Chief Clerk assessed the damages sustained by the Plaintiffs, carrying the assessment down to the date of his certificate: —
Held (affirming the decision of Chitty, J.), that there was a continuing cause of action, within the meaning of Order XXXVI., rule 58, and that the damages were rightly assessed down to the time of the assessment.
THE action in this case was brought by Mr. T. Hole, the owner of a house and lands at Moorlands, in the county of Somerset, against the guardians of the poor of the union of Chard, who were the sanitary authority of the district, to restrain them from polluting a stream which ran through the Plaintiff's land and past his house, by allowing sewage and refuse from certain manufactories to flow into it, so as to be a nuisance to the Plaintiff.
The writ was issued on the 23rd of November, 1888. In May, 1889, the Plaintiff died, and the action was afterwards revived and continued by the devisees under his will.
On the 25th of February, 1890, Mr. Justice Chitty, by whom the action was tried, gave judgment in favour of the Plaintiffs, granting a perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendants from permitting the sewage and refuse to pass into the stream so as to cause a nuisance to the Plaintiffs; and he further ordered an inquiry what damages the Plaintiffs had sustained from the date of the death of the original Plaintiff, T. Hole, by reason of the nuisance committed by the Defendants; the costs of the inquiry to be reserved, with liberty to all parties to apply. But the operation of the injunction was suspended for six months — that is, till the 25th of August, 1890.
The Defendants made some alteration in their works, in order to purify the sewage and refuse before they...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
National Coal Board v Galley
...of any continuing cause of action they shall be assessed down to the time of the assessment". The learned judge relied on the case of Hole v. Chard Union, reported in 1894 (1) Chancery Division, page 293, where damages for nuisance by pollution of a stream were assessed subsequent to the wr......
-
Huggins Neal Nicholas Appellant v [1] Attorney General [2] The Teaching Service Commission Respondents [ECSC]
...both in the breach and in the obligation. The facts of this case do not constitute a continuing cause of action. Hole v Chard Union [1994] 1 Ch 293 and National Coal Board v Galley [1958] 1 WLR 16 applied. BAPTISTE, J.A. [AG.] 1 This appeal has its genesis in the wrongful refusal or failur......
- Wu Siew Ying v Gunung Tunggal Quarry & Construction Sdn Bhd & 2 Ors
-
The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd
...a regular basis. So is the repeated discharge of sewage into a watercourse which runs through the claimant's land: Hole v Chard Union [1894] 1 Ch 293. In such cases there is a continuing cause of action, which accrues afresh from day to day. It is because nuisances are often of a continuing......