Mr Rowe said he had no idea there would be a charge beyond his council and water rates, and applied for judicial review.

[1] Lightman J, treating the case as a private law question of whether the Council was entitled to payment, held that there was enrichment through an incontrovertible benefit, but was no right because there was no unjust factor.

Although the Council argued that Mr Rowe freely accepted the services, there was no acquiescence in their supply for a consideration.

In absence of proof of such acquiescence, the principle of free acceptance cannot be invoked to satisfy the second condition.

But it is common ground that the receipt of the services constituted an incontrovertible benefit and that the second condition is to be deemed to be satisfied for this reason.’ 14.