Posts Tagged ‘Section 17’

Mooring strategy meeting postponed twice

Thursday, July 21st, 2011

The local mooring strategy process appears to be grinding to a halt. The ninth meeting of the steering group, which was to be held in Devizes on June 17th, was postponed because BW decided it would be better to hold it after June 23rd when national user groups were due to meet with BW to “discuss” changes to the Mooring Guidance for Continuous Cruisers following the BW v Davies judgement. If nothing else, this proves that the mooring strategy is designed specifically to target boats without moorings.

BW v Davies sealed judgement

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

The sealed judgement in BW v Paul Davies is now available as a public document.

Press Release 2: British Waterways

Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

The following is a press release issued by British Waterways about the judgement in the case British Waterways v Paul Davies

1 April 2011
British Waterways welcomes today’s (31/3/11) Judgment made in Bristol County Court in which His Honour Deputy Judge O’Malley said he favoured BW’s interpretation of Section 17 of the British Waterways Act 1995 (relating to Continuous Cruising).

Press release 1: NBTA and Paul Davies

Saturday, April 2nd, 2011

The following is a press release issued by the National Bargee Travellers Association www.bargee-traveller.org.uk edited and approved by Paul Davies

British Waterways v Davies: BW must revise continuous cruising guidance but liveaboard boaters’ homes at risk

The judgement in British Waterways v Paul Davies handed down on 31st March 2011 in Bristol County Court could have serious consequences for all continuously cruising live-aboard boaters. However, the outcome also means that British Waterways (BW) is to redraft the Mooring Guidance for Continuous Cruisers. In particular BW is likely to drop the requirement to make a progressive journey and to travel around a significant part of the canal network.

Tales from the Riverbank 2

Friday, February 18th, 2011

The River Lea to be precise.

British Waterways have made proposals for the Lee Navigation that break a number of laws.

The River Lea in Bow

The River Lea in Bow

You can download them here; British Waterways Mooring Management Plan.

Courts must interpret the 1995 BW Act in favour of the public

Thursday, February 3rd, 2011

A boater has recently drawn our attention to Halsbury’s Rules of English Law Volume 44. These are the rules judges and courts refer to when guidance is needed. Few lawyers know or use these rules when representing boaters.

Boaters need to know that the 1971, 1983 and 1995 British Waterways Acts are Local or Private Acts of Parliament. This is to be distinguished from a private member’s Bill/Act which is something entirely different.

Regarding the interpretation of Private Acts, Paragraph 1497 states:

“Where there is any real doubt as to its meaning, a Private Act must be construed strictly against the promoters. It follows that, as between the promoters and members of the public, a Private Act shall be construed liberally in favour of the public, so that 1) Clauses to preserve general rights will be widely interpreted…”

This means that, where there is a dispute between the promoter (BW) and the individual, the court should interpret the legislation liberally in favour of the public, ie the defendant. In other words, when BW terminate a boat licence because the boater is not cruising according to BW’s interpretation of Section 17 (3) c ii (the Mooring Guidance for Continuous Cruisers), the court should rule that BW cannot enforce its own interpretation of the law. If you know anyone who is in this situation, make sure they know about this rule and use it in court!

The boater has recently written to BW asking whether BW takes full account of this when interpreting the 1995 Act against boaters, and if not, why not. He hasn’t had a reply yet…

British Waterways’ unlawful abuse

Wednesday, December 1st, 2010

We have received this message from a boater in the north west about BW’s unlawful enforcement practices:

British Waterways served an injunction on a boat at Nantwich earlier in the year.  The owner lived on the boat and had been refused a licence although offering to pay for one. He left it to the last minute to seek legal advice.  He didn’t turn up at court. An order was made to remove/seize his boat.  He was given 14 days notice. This notice was ignored on the grounds that he might ‘abscond’. Two BW ‘enforcers’ accompanied by two Polish ‘mercenaries’ dressed in BW uniforms came to his boat at 7-o-clock one morning when he wasn’t there.

BW legal action mostly concerns licence evasion

Monday, November 29th, 2010

A boater recently made this Freedom of Information request to BW and got the answer below which suggests that most of the pending legal action against boaters is about licence evasion rather than overstaying, and that BW may be carrying out unlawful enforcement action against 8 boats without home moorings.

Chair of Local Mooring Strategy Steering Group ignores consensus

Monday, November 29th, 2010

The local mooring strategy steering group met again on 8 November. We are able to provide notes of most of the discussion, taken by a volunteer, which are at the end of this article.

The most significant point that emerged at this meeting was the fact that there is a strong consensus among the different interest groups – liveaboard and other boaters, the hire boat industry, local authorities and parish councillors – around the table on the following points:

Photo: Bob Naylor KAcanalTIMES.co.uk7-hna-1534

Boat Dwellers’ Charter

Friday, November 26th, 2010

The Local Mooring Strategy Steering Group has wasted a lot of time talking about its ‘vision’ for the Kennet and Avon Canal. We thought it would be useful to make this statement of our aims in a Boat Dwellers’ Charter. Please give us your comments!

Boat Dwellers’ Charter