Chasemore v Richards (1859)

Law of Torts · The Two Maxims

Facts.

The defendants sank a well on their own land to supply a town. The excavation intercepted underground percolating water and dried up a stream that had fed the plaintiff’s mill for sixty years.

Issue.

Has a landowner a legal right to the continued flow of percolating underground water from beneath a neighbour’s land?

Held.

No. There is no right of property in percolating water before it is appropriated. The defendants had used their own land lawfully, and the plaintiff’s loss gave rise to no cause of action.

Why it matters.

It is the authority behind the recurring “dried-up well” problem, and it pairs with Bradford Corporation v Pickles to show that both an innocent and a malicious use of one’s own land leave the neighbour without a remedy.

📄 Full Law of Torts notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past exam questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · All landmark cases · All Law of Torts topics