Houseboat owners partially successful in appeal over moorings court order

A High Court judge has overturned parts of an order granted to the London Borough of Hounslow against houseboat owners moored on the River Thames in Brentford.

The council had gained a county court order under which the boat residents had to remove vessels from their moorings and remove cables, pipes, walkways, gangplanks, ladders and services running to the vessels across Hounslow’s Watermans Park.

Hounslow was allowed to remove the vessels and equipment as it saw fit if the owners did not comply, and they were required to pay Hounslow damages and costs.

Appellants David Devere, Vernon Roberts, Roger McGonagle, Paul Mendoza, Stephen Javor and Peter McCrudden argued before Mr Justice Morgan that the river itself and certain structures in it was owned by the Port of London Authority, not Hounslow.

Ruling in London Borough of Hounslow v Devere and Others [2018] EWHC 1447 (Ch) the judge noted Hounslow had conceded on the appeal point about removing the vessels.

Morgan J said the main thrust of the remaining appeal was whether the appellants trespassed when they tied up their vessels to posts in the river bed.

He said the county court had been right to conclude there was trespass by running electricity cables and water pipes over Hounslow’s land and mooring to the posts holding up a walkway.

“However, the judge was not right to hold that the appellants had interfered in the past with Hounslow's rights in relation to the other posts, piles and dolphins [a kind of piling] sunk into the river bed,” he said.

Morgan J also said the original judge had been wrong to say that the public may enter Watermans Park only for recreation and so the appellants had trespassed.

“I do not agree with the judge's conclusion,” he said. “I consider that members of the public are entitled to use the park for the purposes of obtaining access to an area adjoining the park…they are so entitled even though their sole object in using the park is as a means of access in that way. If that is right, I cannot see a difference between a member of the public using the park in that way and the appellants using the park as a means of access to their vessels.”

He said the appellants were correct that they should be able to use their vessels “in a way which does not infringe Hounslow's rights.

“Even though anchoring their vessels to the river bed might be a trespass as against the owner of the river bed, that owner is not a party to these proceedings.”

The judge said he would hear submissions on the wording of reviewed orders.

Mark Smulian