Private Property and Abuse of Rights in Victorian England

The leading case of The Mayor, Alderman and Burgesses of the Borough of Bradford v Pickles was the first to establish the principle that it is not unlawful for a property owner to exercise his or her property rights maliciously and to the detriment of others or the public interest. Though controversial at the time, today it is often invisible and taken for granted. This book explores why the common law, in contrast to civil law systems, developed in thisway.During the industrial revolution, the town of Bradford, and with it the demand for water for industrial and domestic purposes, grew rapidly. The first part of the book explores,through an analysis of correspondence, records, and newspaper reports, the development of the Bradford water supply and the genesis of the dispute that ultimately flared into litigation at the end of the nineteenth century.Several aspects of the case are of enduring doctrinal importance 100 years on. The controversial and potent common law principle of interpreting statutes so as to protect property rights wherever possible is examined in depth, as is the legal uncertaintyof subterranean water rights in the nineteenth century. Finally the book attempts to explain the common lawyers' refusal to recognize a Continental-style doctrine of abuse of rights and the courts'failure to develop a prima face tort doctrine to curb maliciously inspired behaviour.

Winner of Winner of the Legal Research Foundation's J.F. Northey Memorial Book Award 2002.

“... this is a work of immense scholarship ... reference is sure to be made to this excellent book.”

"...a workof undoubted scholarship, yet one which remains readable and engaging...it should satisfy the most demanding of private lawyers, whilst at the same time remaining interesting and accessible to anyone with even a passing interest in the history of common law." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly Vol 54 no 1"...an impressive reach of research" Modern Law Review, September 2003"This is an original contribution to our understanding of how local government functioned in the late nineteenth centuty" Modern Law Review, September 2003""...an enlightening study. It is a tour de force of legal forensics and analysis, always intelligent and highly readable even when dealing with some remarkably complex legal doctrine" Modern Law Review, September 2003

Michael Taggart is Professor of Law at The University of Auckland. He studied law at the University of Auckland and Harvard University. He has taught law at the University of Auckland since 1982. Before that he taught at the University of Western Ontario and has visited Queen's University, Canada, the University of Saskatchewen, the University of Toronto and at the Centre for Public Law at the University of Cambridge, New Zealand.

The leading case of The Mayor, Alderman and Burgesses of the Borough of Bradford v Pickles was the first to establish the principle that it is not unlawful for a property owner to exercise his or her property rights maliciously and to the detriment of others or the public interest. Though controversial at the time, today it is often invisible and taken for granted. This book explores why the common law, in contrast to civil law systems, developed in this way.During the industrial revolution, the town of Bradford, and with it the demand for water for industrial and domestic purposes, grew rapidly. The first part of the book explores, through an analysis of correspondence, records, and newspaper reports, the development of the Bradford water supply and the genesis of the dispute that ultimately flared into litigation at the end of the nineteenth century.Several aspects of the case are of enduring doctrinal importance 100 years on. The controversial and potent common law principle of interpreting statutes so as to protect property rights wherever possible is examined in depth, as is the legal uncertainty of subterranean water rights in the nineteenth century. Finally the book attempts to explain the common lawyers' refusal to recognize a Continental-style doctrine of abuse of rights and the courts' failure to develop a prima face tort doctrine to curb maliciously inspired behaviour.

This item is eligible for free returns within 30 days of delivery. See our returns policy for further details.