<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Adverse possession of the river bed</title> <atom:link href="http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/05/adverse-possession-of-the-river-bed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/05/adverse-possession-of-the-river-bed/</link> <description>Housing law news and comment</description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:56:35 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator> <item><title>By: Yola Dragon</title><link>http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/05/adverse-possession-of-the-river-bed/#comment-3214</link> <dc:creator>Yola Dragon</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:15:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/?p=1651#comment-3214</guid> <description>The PLA as navigation authority have a duty to remove obstructions to navigation. If Rupert Ashmore&#039;s barge has been in position for 26 years and the PLA have done nothing to remove it during that time then they can hardly claim that it is an obstruction to navigation now.
There are very many abandoned vessels and wrecks in the Thames but the PLA tends to only remove the ones in or near the river channel; they generally do not to remove the ones close to the river banks on the grounds that such wrecks do not obstruct navigation.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The PLA as navigation authority have a duty to remove obstructions to navigation. If Rupert Ashmore&#8217;s barge has been in position for 26 years and the PLA have done nothing to remove it during that time then they can hardly claim that it is an obstruction to navigation now.</p><p>There are very many abandoned vessels and wrecks in the Thames but the PLA tends to only remove the ones in or near the river channel; they generally do not to remove the ones close to the river banks on the grounds that such wrecks do not obstruct navigation.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Adverse Possession of River Bed &#171; Rowena Meager&#39;s Property Law Blog</title><link>http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/05/adverse-possession-of-the-river-bed/#comment-410</link> <dc:creator>Adverse Possession of River Bed &#171; Rowena Meager&#39;s Property Law Blog</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:09:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/?p=1651#comment-410</guid> <description>[...] another discussion on this case see Nearly Legal&#8217;s blog here and for discussion of a claim to adverse possession of a highway, see here. Possibly related posts: [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] another discussion on this case see Nearly Legal&#8217;s blog here and for discussion of a claim to adverse possession of a highway, see here. Possibly related posts: [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: The Property Law Blog</title><link>http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/05/adverse-possession-of-the-river-bed/#comment-409</link> <dc:creator>The Property Law Blog</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 15:53:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/?p=1651#comment-409</guid> <description>&lt;!--%kramer-ref-pre%--&gt;[...] See&#160;Nearly Legal&#039;s&#160;post here [...]&lt;!--%kramer-ref-post%--&gt;</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a
href="http://dev.wp-plugins.org/wiki/Kramer"><img
src="http://nearlylegal.co.ukblog/wp-content/plugins/kramer.php?kramer=gif-icon" class="technorati-balloon" alt="Kramer auto Pingback" style="border:0;" /></a>[...] See&nbsp;Nearly Legal&#8217;s&nbsp;post here [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
