South West Water is claiming it has no legal obligation to keep rivers and seawater clean of sewage in its defence against a Devon swimmer who is taking the water company to court.

Jo Bateman, who attempts to swim every day off the coast of Exmouth, is taking legal action against South West Water, claiming its frequent sewage discharges into the sea have taken away her legal right to a public “amenity”.

However, in its defence to Ms Bateman’s claim, seen by i, the water firm states no one has a legal right to swim in the sea.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That used to be the case, mostly because the EU had rules about that. Then Brexit happened and dumping of sewage prohibitions were one of the first to be tossed on the bonfire of rules. And joy was in the corprate greedy shriveled heart.

    • OwlPaste@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure there is no legal right not to dump menure on the guys face

  • andrewth09@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hear that boys? Air is not an unalienable right! starts dumping all the fun pool chemicals into some building lobbie’s indoor fountain

    • loutr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, Nestlé argues that people don’t actually have a right to have access to clean water to live, so that doesn’t seem farfetched at all…

  • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    In instances like this you’d think a Monarchy would have strong words about corporations polluting the land.

    But you wont because they are worthless billionaire fucks. All of them deserve to be eaten.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fair, the monarch in the UK is mostly a figurehead. To his credit (and I am far from a monarchist), Charles has been advocating for environmental causes for a very long time. Sometimes stupidly, but he does actually give a shit. I just don’t know that he has the power to do anything about it and the Tories certainly don’t care.

      • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think he can dictate laws, but he can unilaterally dissolve parliament and force an election (same as other commonwealth countries, the queen did that to Australia back in 1975). So if it’s a big enough issue, he technically could use that as a threat, though it would be a pretty nuclear option.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know that this particular event, as heinous as it may be, warrants such an action. That should be reserved for, for example, parliament trying to side with Putin on Ukraine.

          • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, the 1975 incident was because the Tories allowed the government to shut down because they refused to pass a budget. The speaker kicked out the PM, appointed a temporary one, passed the budget, then dissolved parliament entirely. However, the mere threat can sometimes be enough.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m talking about Charles, not Elizabeth. Charles has famously worked for environmental causes for a very long time. He’s often an idiot about it and supports misguided causes, but he’s not in favor of this sort of pollution. He does have to pay fealty to Sunak’s government though. He’s not going to go against any of their major policy initiatives even if he doesn’t agree with them.

          Also, that link doesn’t say anything about environmental laws as far as I can tell.

  • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Its added that even during the peak summer holiday season, South West Water and other firms have no duty to meet certain water quality standards.

    “woah, woah, we’re a sewage company, we dump sewage. we’re not a clean water company. So what duty could we possibly have to dump sewage in a responsible manner?”

    The defence states: “Even during the bathing season, there is no absolute right to swim each day.”

    “you also don’t have an absolute right to walk on a public road, that’s where we’ll be dumping sewage next”

    South West Water said it is the responsibility of the Government and the EA to ensure clean water, not the water companies that manage the nation’s rivers and coastline.

    “Not our job to clean water, you want the Government. We’re just supposed to manage the water near the shore, so we dump all the sewage about a foot past where our jurisdiction stops. See? no problem!”

  • You999@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d love to see a suit like this brought in the US specifically a state like Oregon where you have the right to use beaches.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Does Washington have that law as well? That would mean that we protected the entire west coast of the main 48. I somehow suspect that neither AK or HI have such laws.

      • You999@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I remember correctly yes with one exception for a beach just north of picnic point. That beach is to my knowledge the only privately owned beach in Washington because it used to be a ship salvage yard and several boats are still on the beach.

  • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Holy shit. Is there no law against dumping waste? It seems immaterial whether someone has a ‘right to swim’, that’s not the issue at hand dude