Key Facts
- •The London Borough of Richmond on Thames (Claimant) sought an interim injunction against Alistair Trotman (Defendant) to remove his vessel, KUPE, from its mooring on the River Thames.
- •KUPE was moored using scaffolding poles driven into the riverbed, with a ladder providing access from the vessel to the Claimant's land.
- •The vessel's mooring caused damage to trees and vegetation on the Claimant's land and obstructed other boaters.
- •Multiple notices to remove KUPE were ignored by the Defendant.
- •The Defendant has a history of similar unlawful mooring incidents.
- •The Defendant's vessel was deemed to be in a dangerous and dilapidated state.
Legal Principles
Local authority byelaws regulating mooring on riverbanks are lawful and enforceable.
Akerman v London Borough of Richmond [2017] EWHC 84 (Admin)
A local authority is entitled to take action to prevent trespass on its land.
Cambridge City Council v Traditional Cambridge Tours [2018] EWHC 1304
Rights of navigation on the Thames are subject to restrictions imposed by byelaws.
Thames Conservancy Act 1932, section 79; Thames Navigation Licensing and General Byelaws 1992
Outcomes
Interim injunction granted requiring the removal of KUPE.
The court found that KUPE was moored on the Claimant's land in contravention of byelaws, causing trespass and nuisance. Damages were deemed insufficient remedy due to ongoing damage and the Defendant's bankruptcy. The balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction.