How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ash Your Own Question
Ash
Ash, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 10916
Experience:  Solicitor with 5+ years experience
75100385
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ash is online now

Appeal court case A3/2012/0788, (NCN 2013/EWCA/Cw73) re BW

Resolved Question:

Appeal court case A3/2012/0788, (NCN 2013/EWCA/Cw73) re BW v Nigel Moore tidal river brent, moorings.
Comment by John Guest, London Waterways manager
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Ash replied 3 years ago.
Alex Watts :

Hello my name is ***** ***** I will help you with this. Please note that I am a working Solicitor and may be on and offline as I have to attend Court and meet with clients, even at weekends. As such you may not get an instant response when you reply as this is not an ‘on demand’ live service, but rest assured I will be giving your question my immediate attention upon return. There is no need to wait here, you will get an email when I reply.

Alex Watts :

A copy of the Judgment can be found here:

Alex Watts :

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/73.html

Alex Watts :

Can I clarify anything for you about this today please?

Customer:

I already have the judgement. What I am asking for is the response from the manager/director of the then British Waterways (now CRT) London division John Guest 9JG),who is recorded on the web in the public domain ,that special consideration needs to be made with regard to the vessel charging rules and bye-laws on this specific an unique stretch of the tidal Brent, as a result of this High court decision..the effect on the rest of us, (and I am next door neighbour to Nigel Moore and just as effected as he is ,being also a wharf owner). i saw this JG response when 'surfing the web' but cannot find it now.

Customer:

Also, in para 18.4 of the judgement it suggests that the ownership of the bed of the river, being tidal, is vested in the Crown, and not CRT.is this correct /

Customer:

Thanks,

Alex Watts :

You have rated poor service but asked for more information?

Alex Watts :

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=54361

Alex Watts :

As for Para 18.4 - you are correct, the ownership of the bed is vested in the Crown

Alex Watts :

Does that clarify?

Ash and 2 other Law Specialists are ready to help you