header-logo header-logo

05 March 2014 / Clifford Darton
Issue: 7597 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

In deep water

web_darton

Clifford Darton provides a guide to the rising tide of flooding claims

When the recent floodwaters finally recede, landowners, water (sewerage) companies and land drainage authorities (such as the Environment Agency) could all soon find themselves the subject of claims by those who own or insure flood damaged properties. Unfortunately for these claimants, the task facing them is far more difficult than they often suppose.

There is no such thing as strict liability when it comes to surface water flooding and there are various statutory and common law impediments to establishing liability against each of these three potential defendants. If the rule in Rylands v Fletcher [1861-73] All ER Rep 1 is not now dead for all purposes then it certainly has no application to this area of law.

Landowners & riparian owners

Landowners are under no general obligation to prevent the natural flow of water onto lower land for the reasons recently restated in Arscott v Coal Authority [2003] EWHC 1690 (QB). Likewise, riparian owners (landowners whose properties abut or include a watercourse)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll