Water undertakers—statutory rights, private grant and prescriptive easements (Bate and another v Affinity Water Ltd)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Case details

Article summary

Property Disputes analysis: The court held that there was no need for a water undertaker to elect between private law grant and exercise of its statutory powers when laying a water pipe. Although the dominant tenement in this case was identifiable by reference to extrinsic evidence, the undertaking of the water company itself would likely have been capable of constituting the dominant tenement. Written by Fern Horsfield-Schonhut, barrister, at Falcon Chambers.