• news-banner

    Expert Insights

It’s Never Riparian Rights (Until It Is)

Riparian Rights

Any landowner or developer whose property adjoins or contains a natural watercourse should be aware of the system of rights and obligations along the length of the watercourse known as riparian rights. Developing or using land without giving due consideration to riparian rights can lead to problems.

To start – what are riparian rights?

Riparian rights describe an ancient, non-statutory system of rights relating to any property where there is a natural watercourse within or adjacent to its boundaries. The rights run with the land, passing from landowner to landowner with the grant of a lease or transfer. ‘Riparian owners’ with property abutting a watercourse are presumed to own the land under the water up to the centre line of the watercourse, although the presumption is rebuttable by evidence to the contrary.

The natural rights of a riparian owner in relation to a natural stream are threefold:

  1. A right of use – riparian owners can use the water for certain purposes connected to the land adjoining the watercourse, such as fishing, mooring and discharge into the watercourse (subject to the rights of other riparian owners);
  2. A right of flow – a riparian owner is entitled to have the water come to them and go from them without obstruction;
  3. A right of purity – the water passing through should be unpolluted.

The flow of a natural stream creates interactions between the mutual rights and liabilities of all the riparian owners along the length of its course. By way of example (ignoring for this purpose other regulatory and statutory factors):

  1. Imaginary Housing Ltd (IHL) has purchased a new site for development, which lies adjacent to a river. They plan to market the property to those interested in sailing – as the riparian owner, IHL and its assignees have the right to moor boats on the river.
  2. However, the river is prone to silt build-up on its bed, and driftwood frequently builds up on its banks. IHL and its assignees have a responsibility to riparian owners downstream not to allow the silt and driftwood to obstruct the flow of water to their land, and to the upstream owners not to allow the build up to cause flooding of their land. This responsibility extends to maintaining the river banks and any river walls, in order to avoid liability for flood damage on other property.
  3. IHL is aware of a factory located upriver of their development. If the factory pollutes the water which serves IHL’s land, IHL could pursue an action for private nuisance against the owners of the factory. They will also need to ensure that their own surface water discharge into the river does not become polluted.
    In the example given above, an adjoining, land-locked housing development may need to discharge surface water into the river across IHL’s land. They would need to negotiate a right of discharge by way of easement from IHL. The local kayaking society may also want an access easement in order to launch onto the watercourse.

So, how do problems arise?

When drawing up site boundaries prior to purchase or development, ownership of natural watercourses should be considered carefully as they are often not registered at the Land Registry. In particular, owners of land abutting an unregistered watercourse should remember that the riparian owner of land on the other side will own to the centre line; this is particularly important if works are required to the entirety of the watercourse.

Even when the site boundary is drawn along the edge of a natural watercourse, the land underneath up to the centre line will still pass with any lease or transfer of the land, alongside all riparian rights and responsibilities identified above.

This is a complex area of law, and riparian rights are commonly sidestepped by express grants of easements and licences. Fishing rights, for example, can be separated from the land by the creation of a lease or licence, and documentation, such as private agreements between landowners, may rebut the above presumptions as to riparian ownership. If in doubt, there is always the option of taking out insurance against any unknown factors which have the potential to crop up.

This article was written by James Lamont. For more information please contact James on +44 (0)20 7203 5313  or at James.Lamont@crsblaw.com

Our thinking

  • Mental Health Management

    Nick Hurley


  • Arbitration Act 1996: Law Commission recommends limited changes

    Richard Kiddell


  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises Nortal on its acquisition of Questers

    Hamish Perry


  • Family and Employment law assistance in legal advice deserts

    Sarah Farrelly


  • Property Patter: the latest on the Building Safety Act

    Richard Flenley


  • James Souter writes for City AM on Meta pulling out of its London office

    James Souter

    In the Press

  • Ciara Coyle writes for People Management on ways to ensure ‘invisible’ workers do not go unrecognised

    Ciara Coyle

    In the Press

  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises Puma Private Equity on its £3.5 million investment into TravelLocal

    David Coates


  • Georgina Muskett and Karin Mouhon write for Property Week on the importance of preparation when proposing site redevelopments

    Karin Mouhon

    In the Press

  • China Daily, and other titles, quote Silvia On on trends affecting Chinese HNWIs

    Silvia On

    In the Press

  • The Evening Standard quotes Rose Carey on the increase in visa fees

    Rose Carey

    In the Press

  • Spears quotes Piers Master on the potential exodus of UHNW non-doms from the UK ahead of a potential Labour government

    Piers Master

    In the Press

  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises Zenzero’s management team on its majority acquisition by Macquarie Capital

    Mark Howard


  • David Savage writes for Construction News on the upcoming building-control overhaul

    David Savage

    In the Press

  • Updates and points to note in relation to buy-to-let residential properties

    Twiggy Ho


  • Felicity Chapman writes for Insider Media on alternatives to court for divorcing business owners

    Felicity Chapman

    In the Press

  • Investment Week quotes Julia Cox on the proposed scrapping of inheritance tax

    Julia Cox

    In the Press

  • Charles Russell Speechlys expands commercial offering with the appointment of Rebecca Steer

    Rebecca Steer


  • The Times quotes Gareth Mills on the CMA’s preliminary approval of the Activision Blizzard-Microsoft deal

    Gareth Mills

    In the Press

  • Heritage property and conditional exemption

    Sarah Wray


Back to top