Law Reports. Chancery Division Volume 1 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1899 edition. Excerpt: ... in land to justify the appointment of a receiver with a view to realization. Solicitors: Clinton a C0.; F. Hatton, for T. Rhodes, Halifax. G. I. F. C. VESTRY OF ST. MARY, BATTERSEA 1: . COUNTY OF LONDON AND BRUSH PROVINCIAL ELECTRIC LIGHTING COMPANY, LIMITED. Held, that the decision of the House of Lords in Tunbridge Wells Corporation v. Baird, 1896 A. C. 434, as to the extent to which the soil of a street is vested in a local authority, under s. 149 of the Public Health Act, 1875, applies to the similar vesting in a local authority under s. 96 of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, so that the soil of a street is vested in a Vestry under s. 96 only so far " as is necessary for the control, protection and maintenance of the street as a highway for public use.."An electric lighting company had illegally broken up the surface of a street within the district of:1. Vestry in the metropolis, and placed their pipes' and wires at a depth of about two feet below the surface: Hcld, that the vestry were not by virtue of s. 96 the owners of the soil-of, the street at that depth, and that, although the company had acted illegally in breaking up the street, the vestry could not maintain an action for a mandatory injimction to compel the company to remove their pipes ' and wires, there being no continuing trespass upon or interference with any right of the vestry. I Decision of Jeunc P. (to whom the above case was not cited) reversed. APPEAL by the defendants against a decision of Jeune P., sitting as an additional judge of the Chancery Division. The plaintiff vestry had the management and control of all streets situate within the parish of St. Mary, Battersea, and by s. 96 of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, all those streets...