Water companies discharging raw sewage into Britain’s waterways can now be sued for damages, according to a landmark Supreme Court ruling. This decision allows private entities owning canals, rivers, or lakes to take legal action against businesses that contaminate their waters with untreated sewage.
The Manchester Ship Canal Company has been in a legal dispute with United Utilities since 2018 over the company's right to discharge raw sewage into the canal without the owner's consent.
The canal, a 36-mile Victorian waterway connecting Manchester to the Mersey Estuary, is at the centre of this test case, which now sets a precedent for seeking damages from sewage companies.
United Utilities, which services seven million customers in the northwest of England, is one of ten private water companies in England and Wales.
These companies, privatised in 1989 under Margaret Thatcher's government, have been shielded from legal actions by the 1991 Water Industry Act. In 2021, the High Court ruled that this act permitted United Utilities to pollute the canal without the owner's consent unless the discharges were intentional or negligent.
However, the Supreme Court clarified that the 1991 Act only authorises the discharge of treated waste and excess surface water, not raw sewage. The judges stated, "The 1991 Act does not authorise sewerage undertakers to cause a nuisance or to trespass by discharging untreated effluent into watercourses."
Lord Reed and Lord Hodges affirmed that waterway owners have "fundamental common law rights" to sue for damages, regardless of whether sewage discharges were intentional or negligent. They emphasised that investments in improved infrastructure could prevent such pollution.
Peel Ports Group and the Manchester Ship Canal Company expressed satisfaction with the ruling, while United Utilities has yet to comment.