The construction of a bridge across a stream at a point above the tide, but where the public by user have a right of navigation, will not be prevented where it does not, and is not likely to, interfere with navigation.

—the application was to set aside a sale by the plaintiff of his reversion expectant on the death of his father, the turning-point of the case in the House of Lords was the fact that the purchaser at the time of the sale reasonably believed the father's life to be a good one.

Thus, where such a right was established in a freshwater river, it was "substantially a mere right to use the river for the purposes of navigation similar to the right the public may have to passage along a public road or foot path through a private estate."

Where such circumstances are shown to have existed, an onus is cast upon the stronger party to show that the transaction was fair, just and reasonable: 'the burthen of shewing the fairness of the transaction is thrown on the person who seeks to obtain the benefit of the contract

—was a case of injury to the alveus; and the sentence quoted from LORD CHELMSFORD'S judgment does not appear to have been necessary for the decision of the case

—held that where the encroachment on the bed of the stream (in that case a non-navigable one) is so slight as not to cause any sensible alteration in the flow of the water, it is not such an injury to the right of the proprietor on the opposite side ast would sustain an action.

"There are two totally distinct and different things; the one is the right of property and the other is the right of navigation. The right of navigation is simply a right of way, and with that right of way you must not interfere in any course you take."

Deane J The jurisdiction of courts of equity to relieve against unconscionable dealing developed from the jurisdiction which the Court of Chancery assumed, at a very early period, to set aside transactions in which expectant heirs had dealt with their expectations without being adequately protected against the pressure put upon them by their poverty

A man has further the right to divert the water of a stream without asking the permission of the proprietors above or below, provided he returns the water to its natural channel before leaving his land, and does not obstruct its course

"These changes in the law have in no degree whatever altered the onus probandi in those cases which, according to the language of Lord Hardwicke,'raise from the circumstances or conditions of the parties contracting, weakness on one side, usury on the other, or extortion, or advantage taken of that weak-(1)(1873) LR, 8 Ch. Ap., 484.

[CITATION] The Wellesley Sea Claim: An Overview

[CITATION] Annual Review of Irish Law

[CITATION] Annual Review of Irish Law

[BOOK] Lunney & Oliphant's Tort Law: Text and Materials

[BOOK] Rethinking Unjust Enrichment: History, Sociology, Doctrine, and Theory