Hi...
I am not a lawyer but have some experience and opinions which may narrow your thinking. You have had two worthwhile responses, one that lawyers/solicitors operate only in areas for which they are licensed, the other concerning the agreement.
Whilst compensation, mentioned by one other respondent, might be an entitlement for providing an easement and transactions in land generally attract a fee simple or rent or compensation this easement may not have and in any event it is irrelevant it seems to me. What we have here is an easement for a purpose not for access and it may or may not be situated on the right of way. In fact the right of way is one thing I'd be looking at as rights of way have limitations.
Does it serve you both (and others) and which of you is first on the access? Which land is dominant and which servitude?...either of you?...does he rent or lease or is he proprietor? Are you Lot 1? Is the right of way registered on your title? And on his title?.
The easement is poorly written in terms of dispute. It also does not nominate resolution procedure, presumably not expecting any.
There is an easement (on the right of way?) allowing a pipeline to be buried to service the cottage lot with water. Which is 'the cottage lot'. The pipeline is to be at least 30 cms below ground. Is it so buried? Is the flow meter (or other apparatus) specified in situ, working correctly? and accurately, perhaps even sometimes tested for accuracy, clearly measurable?
The agreement specifies 'the bore-hole' which may indicate it existed and serving Lot 1 before 'the cottage lot' (Lot 2?) became a cottage entity. It speaks of a person with 'an interest in' the cottage lot...which need not be an proprietor , could be a person renting or leasing 'the cottage'...could be worse things which I'll pass over...but it must be ultimately 'a lawful interest in'. It also refers to the owner of the cottage installing a water pump, not stating using someone else's so....are you using his or he using yours?...Or both using on mutually installed.
Whilst it may seem reasonable to disconnect your electricity or use a demand system which only works on your need for water and not his , you face two issues...Harm done which he may claim by taking such action and the possibility that he uses a different phase to activate the pump (if 3 phase supply) which will cause electrical damage of both phases inter-connect...Also by the way an illegal connection. I'd not go there. Solar, unless you change to low voltage pumping would be expensive to use with an inverter and batteries...and perhaps not reliable.
For me, it's time to now say, this schedule it is a pakapoo ticket now, uaddresse with un-initialled alterations and undated signatures using the same witness for all parties.. Are you and neighbour the signatories? Baliestrieri is apparently the person with interest in Lot 2 ..(is that the cottage lot?) if so is Byrne the other party owning or leasing Lot 1?...or is there also some other Lot. By the sound of it You may be Lot 1, with the expectations of some other party (Lot 2..?)
The January, April July December dates are ambiguous as to whether water on the first day or electricity on the first day...I'll presume it to be the electrical settlement dates but I cannot be certain looking at the ordinary form of words written by a person not used to such words. This tome looks like a modified form of a typical easement statement not one made by a competent solicitor.
What is the right of way status?...surveyed and registered or not?
Which lot are you?
Is the pipework underground as described and who laid it?
Is your neighbour the signatory to this agreement or came later?..or did you both come later than Townsend and Atkinson?.
If circumstances have changed this agreement might wisely have been remodelled by say your solicitor and put to the other side for peaceful resolution. I would not have signed it, particularly when not the initial parties to it as things have changed...the pump is 'in' for example..
The agreement at signing was that the cottage owner is permitted to install the system (perhaps thus the claim of your neighbour that he 'owns' it) provided that he maintains a flow meter or other apparatus as specified. It relates that measured volume to the costs per litre a assessed by the Hydro Electric Commissioner or his successor'.
I presume there is no limit on water drawn. If there is one then a water volume meter not a 'flow' meter will have to be installed each party's water line. I say that as a flow meter indicates rate of volume and to measure that requires a timing device as well.
The agreement is in my mind, a mess. One party was allowed to install a pump and ancilliary equipment under specified conditions only for use on cottage land yet the agreement infers that you will be both using the pump...or that you will be supplying the electricity for him to use all the bore water which passes through his pump but which measured in a way to reflect accurate electricity costs at any time and you will:
a) Have no use of the pump
b) Have some use of the pump he installs with your paying your share (by inference)
c) Provide the electricity for him for which, by accurate and contemporary charge measure he quarterly pays....
An electricity meter installed for the purpose at your switchboard...solely for the pump will be the soundest choice..
Is it practical for the present 'cottage owner' to now provide electricity to the pump?. If so your installing another pump may help resolve the situation and you can talk to the EPA about his wasted water situation and be guided by them.
My suggestion is that you install your own pump on your own supply and supply your own electricity to it disconnecting from the existing pump but I suggest a legal enquiry first even though he is not paying his way. Tell the solicitor you want a complete picture of the situation in writing in one session and have every document you can find on the matter with you.
You see one of the important questions is 'does this agreement actually apply to yu as it stands', another is 'can you withdraw from it another is when he is not meeting it, whether a good agreement or bad, can you cut him off from electricity and provide your own pump. To my mind this was an agreement between neighbourly people which has no proper arrangements for un-neighbourly people whether one or both parties.
Livestock
I see nothing excluding watering his stock which are 'on' the cottage land , however it was expected he would be paying for the volume of water used in terms of its electricity costs. That livestock were not mentioned, unfortunately, may neither include nor exclude them with the weight on the inclusion. Whether or not, you are entitled to true costs of his water usage provided by your electricity irrespective of who 'owns' the pump...which may be ascertainable with some investigation.
Is there a measurement system ensuring for a reasonable man ("the man on a Bondi bus") that your neighbour will be correctly charged.
The neighbour to lot one is entitled to have repairs done to the water system. Without that he may ignore your demands on quantum BUT...if you can prove he is using water through the system I think I would claim for the reasonable costs of electricity, with proof as best possible
The agreement seems to me to be clear that the arrangement was ''for the use only on the cottage land" which may mean the cottage domestics were to be tank supplied. (Is the water potable?).Then he is to install a flow meter. On the basis of the agreement I think it logical that the flow meter was to be measure water passing though his pump and the electricity supplied by Lot 1.
Yes the supreme court is where these matters can end but I suggest you install an electricity (KWH) reading meter at your switchboard, where it will only read pump electricity. When he does not pay I suggest you take action for recovery and upon this measurement, base a proposition of 'outstanding' amount.
Seek to recover the whole debt across the years and allow the magistrate to decide, whether you agree or not. You can likely appeal to the District Court but generally only on point of law....and it might be chaper to sink your own bore. Electrical disconnection and installing your own pump are 'critical' issues for long term resolution.
The Magistrate might add some weight in clarifying the matters. You might also ask his or the Chamber Magistrate's advice on have a formal agreement made which is properly written, agreed and formally signed using signature witnesses who cannot cloud the issues.
Finally you may both be not so hot on conversation...find out if there is a dispute resolution organisation or whether both of you will agree to have your dispute resolved by parties on whom you both agree but are not connected to either of you....and 'legally' check that right of way.
