Page images
PDF
EPUB

And I am supported in this by the analogy of several

cases.

[1863.]

Moore v. The Great Southern and Western Rail- CHAMBERLAIN

V.

WEST END OF

CRYSTAL PALACE Railway Company.

way Company (a) is in principle very closely allied to the present, for there the Company did not take any LONDON and part of the plaintiff's land, but, in order to lower the road, made a deep cutting along the boundary of his land, so that he was deprived of the easy access to his house and premises which he before enjoyed; and it was held that this was a permanent injury for which he was entitled to compensation. Here the Railway Company have substituted a new highway for the old one; the old highway is blocked up, and the plaintiff's houses are as inaccessible as was the plaintiff's house in Moore v. The Great Southern and Western Railway Company (a). The same principle was acted upon in Reg. v. The Eastern Counties Railway Company (b), where the Company, in order to carry their railway over a highway which before passed the prosecutor's land on a level, lowered the road so that his land was left on a high bank. I do not rely on Tuohey v. The Great Southern and Western Railway Company (c) because there was special damage besides the lowering of the road, viz. the causing mud to accumulate against the plaintiff's house. The other cases are abundant authority for our decision in favour of the plaintiff in the present case.

Mr. Clarke relied upon The Caledonian Railway Company v. Ogilvy (d), where the defendant was held not entitled to compensation by reason of the railway

(a) 10 Irish Com. Law Rep. 46.

(b) 2 Q. B. 347.

(c) 10 Irish Com. Law Rep. 98.
(d) 2 Macq. 229.

V.

WEST END OF

[1863.] crossing the highway on a level near the lodge to his CHAMBERLAIN mansion. That looks like a judgment in favour of the defendants; but the principle of that judgment was that LONDON and the respondent was claiming compensation for a personal inconvenience or annoyance and not for injury to his property.

CRYSTAL

PALACE Railway Company.

It was said that these houses of the plaintiff are an inchoate speculation; four of them being completed and the rest being only in a state of inception. It was further contended that the damages were imaginary merely; and Lee v. Milner (a), was cited to shew that there could be no assessment of future damages, and that the plaintiff was bound to wait until the injury had occurred. But that case fails to support Mr Clarke's argument. A person seeking to obtain compensation under these Acts of Parliament must once for all make one claim for all damages which can be reasonably foreseen. In Lee v. Milner, the jury, summoned under The Aire and Calder Navigation Act, 9 G. 4. c. xcviii. to assess the sums of money to be paid to a tramroad Company for the purchase of land and for damages, found the value of the land, 61., present damages, 0, future damages 2800l. The Court held that the sum for future damages, which might never be suffered, could not be given by reason of the particular words of the special Act, which empowered the jury to assess the damages "for the future temporary or perpetual continuance of any recurring damages which shall have been so occasioned as aforesaid:" and it was considered that these words restrained the jury from giving damages unless there was

(a) 2 M. & W. 824.

[1863.]

CHAMBERLAIN

V.

WEST END OF

CRYSTAL
PALACE

Railway

Company.

a permanent subsisting cause of injury, and that the Company had a peculiar privilege of requiring the undertakers of The Aire and Calder Navigation to summon a jury from time to time whenever a new cause of LONDON and injury to the tramroad arose. Under The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and The Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, the party claiming compensation must bring forward his claim in unity, as far as he can foresee the damages which will arise, estimating them as having as much permanency as the railway; for we must take for granted that the arbitrator has considered the question whether the railway was likely to continue. We do not go into the question of value; the principle on which the arbitrator acted is right.

POLLOCK C. B. and CHANNELL B., and WILLIAMS and KEATING JJ. concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

1562.

Thursday, April 24th.

Hahray.
Public Nui-

sance.

Tramways.
Metropolis

Local Manage
ment Act,
18 & 19 Vict.
c. 120. s. 98.

The QUEEN against TRAIN, HATHAWAY and

others.

A person, without the authority of Parliament, but with the concurrence of and by virtue of a contract with the vestry of the parish, laid down in one of the streets of the metropolis a double line of tramways on which omnit uses of a peculiar construction plied for hire. These tramways were dangerous and inconvenient to many of the public, as the wheels of vehicles skidded when crossing the tramway, and horses which put their feet upon it were startled: held,

1. That this was a public nuisance, even though those tramways might be for the convenience of the public generally.

2. That what was here done could not be looked on as a mode of paving the street, and consequently not within the powers conferred on vestries by The Metropolis Local Management Act, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 120. 8. 98.

INDICTMENT. The first count charged that the

defendants, on the 17th January, 1861, and on divers other days and times continuously &c., a certain road, situate in the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, in the county of Surrey, leading from Kennington Park, in the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, to the south side of Westminster Bridge, in the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, part whereof was known by the name of the Kennington Road and the other part whereof was known by the name of the Westminster Bridge Road, then and during all the time aforesaid being the Queen's common highway, used for all the liege subjects of our Lady the Queen, with their horses, coaches, carts and carriages to go, return, pass, repass, ride and labour at their free. will and pleasure, unlawfully and injuriously did dig, entrench and cut into, and cause and procure to be dug, entrenched and cut into; and thereby then made, and caused and procured to be made, in the said common highway, divers large and deep holes, to wit, to the

1862.

V.

TRAIN.

number of 1000, and each of the depth of 1 foot, and divers deep and long trenches in the said common high- The QUEEN way, to wit, of the depth of 1 foot and the length of 2000 yards; and then removed and caused and procured to be removed from the said common highway large quantities, to wit, 500 tons, of stone and earth of the soil of the said common highway; and unlawfully and injuriously did then lay down, place, and construct, and cause and procure to be laid down, placed and constructed, upon the said common highway, a certain iron tramway, extending for a long distance, to wit, for the distance of 2000 yards, along the said common highway; and unlawfully and injuriously did then lay and place, and cause and procure to be laid and placed, upon the said common highway, divers large quantities, to wit, 200 loads, of timber and 200 tons of iron rails; and so continued and permitted the said iron tramway and the said timber and iron rails to remain and be upon the said common highway from the day first aforesaid continually up to the time of the taking of this inquisition : Whereby the Queen's common highway aforesaid, then and on the first days and times aforesaid, to wit, from the day first aforesaid continually &c., was obstructed, straitened and encumbered, and rendered rough, uneven and dangerous, so that the liege subjects of our said lady the Queen could not, then and during the times aforesaid, go, return, pass, repass, ride and labour with their horses, coaches, carts and other carriages in, through, and along the Queen's common highway aforesaid, as they ought and were wont and accustomed to do: To the great damage and common nuisance of all Her Majesty's liege subjects going, returning, passing, repassing, riding and labouring in, through, and along

« PreviousContinue »