Private property owners can now take legal action against water companies which dump raw sewage into canals, rivers and other bodies of water in England and Wales.
The Supreme Court ruled in The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd (No 2) that the law does not prevent the Manchester Ship Canal from making claims for damages over unauthorised discharges of waste.
BDB Pitmans, the law firm that represented Manchester Ship Canal, said the decision potentially opens the doors to substantial claims against sewerage undertakers for water pollution.
The decision is the latest turn in a long-running battle between the Manchester Ship Canal, owned by the Peel Group, and United Utilities.
The Manchester Ship Canal, built in the 1890s, extends 36 miles from the Mersey Estuary to Salford Quays and includes over 100 outfalls along the length of the canal through which United Utilities releases effluent from its wastewater network.
Whilst most of that effluent is treated, the Supreme Court heard that raw sewage is dumped into the canal when the network is operating over capacity. The Supreme Court judges said this could be avoided if the company “invested in improved infrastructure and treatment”.
The unanimous Supreme Court decision, which overturns decisions in the High Court and Court of Appeal, entitles the Manchester Ship Canal to bring a nuisance or trespass claim for unauthorised sewage discharges even where there had been “no negligence or deliberate misconduct”.
The court made clear that water companies will not be permitted to leave watercourse owners to bear the clean-up costs of unauthorised sewerage discharges, stating that “a successful claim for damages for incidents of pollution of a watercourse will impose costs on a sewerage undertaker; but the effect is merely to prevent it from externalising the costs of its operations by leaving them to be borne by the victims of its unlawful behaviour”.
Richard Langley, senior partner, BDB Pitmans representing the Manchester Ship Canal, said: “The judgment has significant consequences for the water industry and those affected by unauthorised sewerage discharges. Any watercourse owner will now have a right to bring claims in common law nuisance in respect of pollution to their water, whether directly or upstream, and to seek injunctions to restrain polluting activity by any sewerage undertaker and/or damages for the unlawful interference with the watercourse.”
A United Utilities spokesperson said: “We are considering the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling and the clarification of the circumstances in which private owners could bring proceedings in respect of discharges.
“We understand and share people’s concerns about the need for change and we have already made an early start on an ambitious proposed £3 billion programme to improve over 400 storm overflows across the North West which would cut spills by 60% over the decade to 2030. These proposals form part of our business plan which is currently under consideration as part of Ofwat’s price review process.”
