Supreme Court rules United Utilities can be sued over Manchester Ship Canal sewage

A COURT battle has been won to sue United Utilities over sewage spills polluting water in Manchester Ship Canal.

Manchester Ship Canal Company can take civil action against the Great Sankey headquartered utilities provider following a decision by the UK Supreme Court.

It follows a long-running dispute between United Utilities and the private company, owned by Peel Ports Group, which began in 2010 and has entered the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Manchester Ship Canal Company was initially blocked from taking legal action against United Utilities over untreated sewage spills.

But it managed to overturn the decision on appeal at the Supreme Court, which was announced today, Tuesday.

The highest court in the UK was asked to decide by Manchester Ship Canal Company, the owner of the canal’s beds and banks.

The Supreme Court ruled: “The owner of a canal or other watercourse has a property right in the watercourse, including a right to preserve the quality of the water.

United Utilities can be sued, the UK Supreme Court has ruled

“That right is protected by the common law.

“The discharge of polluting effluent into a privately-owned watercourse is an actionable nuisance at common law if the pollution interferes with the owner’s use or enjoyment of its property.”

The ruling could pave the way for others to take action against water firms that release untreated sewage into waterways.

Manchester Ship Canal, which opened in 1894, runs straight through Warrington and connects Manchester to Liverpool, providing a key route for goods coming and going from the north west’s industrial heartlands.

Treated waste is released from the sewage network on around 100 United Utilities outfalls along Manchester Ship Canal.

When the system is ‘over capacity’, raw sewage has been known to have entered the watercourse.

Protest vans have previously been parked outside United Utilities' Warrington HQ

Supreme Court judges ruled that this ‘could be avoided’ if United Utilities ‘invested in improved infrastructure and treatment.

United Utilities said it will consider the ruling and understands the need for change.

A spokesman said: “We are considering the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling and the clarification of the circumstances in which private owners could bring proceedings in respect of discharges.

“We understand and share people’s concerns about the need for change, and we have already made an early start on an ambitious proposed £3billion programme to improve more than 400 storm overflows across the north west, which would cut spills by 60 per cent over the decade to 2030.

“These proposals form part of our business plan which is currently under consideration as part of Ofwat’s price review process.”

A spokesman for Peel Ports Group and Manchester Ship Canal Company said: “We are pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision, which concludes that a watercourse owner does have the right to bring legal action against a water company that discharges pollution into its watercourse.”