Rooke v Withers (1597) 5 CO REP 99

Court: Court of Common Pleas

Facts: Under the statute of sewers 1531, the commissioners of sewers were empowered to build, repair, or remove ditches and banks to manage flooding and could charge landowners for the costs deemed most convenient. The commissioners undertook repairs to a bank along the Thames estuary to protect 800 acres of land from flooding. Mr. Rooke owned only 7 acres of this land but was charged for the entire cost of the repairs.

Issue: Was the decision of the commissioners to charge Mr. Rooke for the full cost of the repairs lawful, considering the proportion of land he owned?

Held: The court held that the commissioners' decision was unlawful for two reasons: (1) It was unfair to charge Mr. Rooke for the full cost of the work when he owned less than 1% of the land benefiting from the repairs; (2) It was inefficient to charge him the entire cost, as spreading the expenses among all affected landowners would allow the commissioners to recover more money and carry out the necessary works more effectively. The court found the commissioners' decision to be unreasonable and thus irrational.

Key Judicial Statements: The ruling underscored that the actions of public authorities must be reasonable and proportionate to the circumstances, especially in matters affecting the financial responsibilities of individuals.

💡 Leveluplaw: illustrates the principle of irrationality in administrative decision-making, highlighting that public bodies must consider fairness and efficiency when imposing charges on individuals for collective benefits. It sets a precedent for ensuring that decisions are not only lawful but also reasonable and just.