Public has no right to swim in sea, claims firm that dumped sewage at bathing spot - eviltoast
As South West Water defends a court action from a Devon swimmer, it also claims it has no legal duty to keep waters clean

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.

  • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.eeEnglish
    455·
    8 months 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
      212·
      8 months 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.worldEnglish
        3·
        8 months 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
          2·
          8 months 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.worldEnglish
            3·
            8 months 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
          2·
          8 months 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.