The New River Company, Appellants against Sarah Johnson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 January 1860 |
| Date | 18 January 1860 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 121 E.R. 164
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, AND THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
S. C. 29. L. J. M. C. 93; 1 L. T. 295; 6 Jur. N. S. 374; 8 W. R. 179. Referred to Rhodes v. Airadale Drainage. Commissioner, 1857, 1 C. P. D. 390. 402. Applied, Jardeson v, Southcoates and Drypool Gas Company, 1899 2 Ch 250.
thb new eiver company, Appellants, against sarah johnson, Respondent. Wednesday, January 18th, 1860. A person who sustains injury from the execution of works authorized by a statute, is not, generally speaking, entitled to compensation, under the compensation clauses of the statute, unless the injury sustained is such as, had the works riot been authorized by the statute, would have given the claimant a right of action.-Appellants, in the execution of works authorized by a local Act, which incorporated The Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, 10 & 11 Viet. c. 17, intercepted water from percolating underground into a well belonging to respondent; and also abstracted from the well water which had already so percolated into and was in it. The said Act, 10 & 11 Viot. c. 17, enacts, by sect. 12, "that in the exercise of" the powers conferred by the Act "the undertakers shall do aa little damage as can be," "and shall make full compensation to all parties interested for all damage sustained by them through the exercise of such powers."-Held that, inasmuch as, apart from the statute, no action would have lain by respondent against appellants in respect of either the interception or the abstraction of such water, the statute gave respondent no right to compensation in respect of either. [S. C. 29 L. J. M. C. 93; 1 L. T. 295 ; 6 Jur. N. S. 374; 8 W. R. 179. Referred to, Rhodes v. Airedale Drainage} Commissioners, 1876, 1 C. P. D. 390, 402. Applied, Jordeson v. Suiton, Southcoates and Drypool Gas Company, [1899] 2 Ch. 250.] Case stated by justices under stat. 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43. On 3rd February, 1859, the appellants appeared before the justices of the borough of Hertford, in pursuance of a summons issued upon the complaint of the respondent, who complained that the appellants, in making and constructing a certain sewer or drain commencing in the [436] parish of Saint Andrew, in the said borough, and terminating in the said parish by a junction with another sewer or drain, under the provisions of The New River Company's (Hertford Sewerage Diversion) Act, 1854, 17 & 18 Viet. c. xxxix.(a), and of the several Acts incorporated therewith, drained the spring of a certain well belonging to a messuage and premises situate in the North Crescent, in the said pariah, belonging to the respondent, in consequence whereof the respondent had been compelled considerably to deepen the said well, and to do other works attending the same, in order to obtain a proper supply of water, and had incurred expense or sustained damage to the amount of 21. 16s. 7d. It was proved that the appellants were authorized by stat. 17 & 18 Viet. c. xxxix., a copy of which accompanied and was to be taken as part of the case, to construct certain sewers, drains and other works in and near the town of Hertford. That by the 3rd section of the said Act there were incorporated therewith several provisions, clauses and sections of The Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, 10 & 11 Viet. c. 17, amongst which were those with respect to the construction of the waterworks, and (a) Local and personal, public. JEL. 4EL.UT. THE NEW RITER COMPANY V.JOHNSON 165 with reapect to the recovery of damages not specially provided for, and of penalties, and to the determination of any other matter referred to justices; and it was also enacted by the same section that, in construing those sections of The Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, in connection with the principal Act, the word "Waterworks" should be deemed to include sewers and drains. That, by the 12th section of The Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, the undertakers were empowered to execute certain works therein named; but it was also provided that [437] they should make full compensation to all parties interested, for all damage sustained by them through the exercise of auch powers. That, by the 140th and 142nd sections of The Eailways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Viet. c. 20), (incorporated in the said Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, by the 85th section thereof), it was provided that any damages, costs or expences directed to be paid, and the method of ascertaining the amount or enforcing the payment whereof was not otherwise provided for by the said Act, or the special or other Act incorporated therewith, should be ascertained and...
To continue reading
Request your trial