header-logo header-logo

15 February 2013
Issue: 7548 / Categories: Case law
printer mail-detail

Public health

Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd and another v United Utilities Water plc [2013] EWCA Civ 40, [2013] All ER (D) 72 (Feb)

On the true interpretation of s 4 of the Water Act 1989, the expression “rights...under enactments” was not apt to cover the implied right of discharge. It was clear from s 4 that the transfer scheme was intended to apply to the whole of the transferor’s sewerage undertaking. It was clearly the purpose of the transfer scheme to ensure that all assets and rights were vested in the successor company by a single document. Therefore, the transfer scheme was not limited to matters for which a written agreement was required, or to transfers of non-assignable contracts or to property-related rights and liabilities.

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

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

From global fraud cases to fishing off-grid, Mishcon de Reya’s chair of dispute resolution Hugo Plowman discusses mentors, management switching off

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll