Case list easements - case list PDF

Preview

Summary

case list
...

Description

Case list: Easements The right must accommodate the dominant tenant; Moody V Steggles: Issue: An easement was granted in favour of a pub owner to affix a sign to an adjourning property Outcome: this was a valid easement, it did not accommodate the owner of the land but the use of the dominant land as a business, and would benefit future owners too Polo Woods Foundation V Shelton-Agar: Issue: was the right to graze horses in the servient piece of land a valid easement Outcome: Yes, as it benefitted the dominant land for it commercial purposes (a farm), this would be passed onto future owners The right is capable of forming the subject matter of grants; Ellenborough Park; Issue: were the facts too vague to form an easement Outcome: No, this was a valid easement as “full enjoyment of the pleasure ground” was meant that they could enjoy it in present state but not ruin by picking flowers etc Rance V Elvin [1985]: Issue: a water company supplied water to the dominant and servient land through water pipes under the servient land, the owner of the dominant land claimed that this was an easement as he was entitled to a uninterrupted supply of water. BUT because the meter for the water was connected only to the servient land, this required a positive act from the servient landowner to pay for the water going to the dominant land Outcome: as a positive act from a servient landowner cannot fall into an easement, in this case it would have done, this was not granted as an easement EXCEPTION: Jones v Price; Issue: as an easement can only require activity of the dominant owner (walking on land, having a sign up etc) can asking the servient owner to maintain a fence so his sheep don’t trespass the dominant land be an easement s this is a positive act of the servient land which cannot be required usually Outcome: This was upheld to be an easement: as it was the only way to stop the sheep from going onto his land and trespassing – the fence was allowed as a positive act

The right cannot be too extensive; Bachelor V Marlow; Issue: A man who owned a local garage used the grass verges (which were not his land) to park all 6 cars on – leaving no space on the verges for anyone else to park, including the owner of the land – the garage owner claimed there was an easement to use the land Monday – Friday all day Outcome: As this would greatly infringe on the owner of the lands right to use the land how he wanted and get reasonable enjoyment out of it, this was not capable of being an easement

Moncrieff V Jamieson; Issue: the dominant land was very hard to get to by car but was given an easement to allow them to drive through the servient land to access their property. There was no parking on the dominant land property so they would have to drive through the servient land, unload and then park elsewhere. The dominant landowners suggested that the easement to drive across the servient land also included the right to park there Outcome: this was allowed as an easement, these ancillary rights were necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of the dominant land and they must have been in contemplation when the easement was granted – the ancillary rights negate a claim to exclusive possession – the servient owner may still use this land for other purposes (Did not overrule Batchelor V Marlow) 4th Sub Rule: A Right can’t qualify as an easement if the right is purely recreational Regency Villas V Diamond Resorts; Issue: Can an easement be purely for recreation and entertainment, but little practical benefit Outcome: YES – upon appeal, the SC said that modern day life, the enjoyment of facilities could be covered by an easement. Such rights must satisfy the accommodation test by delivering benefit or utility to the land – the access to the facilities was essential to the enjoyment of the land

NEGATIVE EASEMENTS: allowed as easements despite the fact they don’t require any action Phipps V Pears; Issue: Can the owner of one house claim the right to have his house protected by the other house from the elements – he wanted a negative easement to stop the connected house being torn down Outcome: the court held that a mere inconvenience or slight loss of benefit is not ample grounds for an easement to be granted “every man is entitled to pull down his house of he likes” created an exhaustive list – this cannot be added to, these are the only negative easements to exist 1. 2. 3. 4.

Rights to a flow of water through an artificial channel across the servient land A flow of air across the servient land A flow of light to a particular aperture and; The servient land support for buildings on the dominant land

IMPLIED EASEMENTS: Wheldon v Burrows; Issue: A workshop and piece of land were sold separately – the person put up a wall next to the workshop blocking all land, was there an easement, at the point of sale which allowed for the enjoyment of the land and natural light to be necessary? Outcome: the original owner of the land has not reserved a right of access to light to the property and therefore no such right was passed down to the new owner

COMMON INTENTION NECESSITY: Wong V Beaumont Property; Issue: a lease was granted for use of cellars in a property for a restaurant under the condition that the restaurant remained up to food hygiene standards. Upon inspection for hygiene reasons, air vents were needed to be placed on the outside of the building and the landlord refused. Tennant claimed the right under easement of common necessity that to carry on the tenancy they needed this ventilation Outcome: easement was granted as it was necessary to the enjoyment and safe use of the land

RESTRICTIONS ON THE APPLICATION OF S.62 Green v Ashco; can’t be on a permissive basis Issue: a right of way or access through a passageway was permitted but often locked, requiring permission for each access Outcome: Section 62 LPA would not convert this right into an easement

Goldberg V Edwards; isn’t enjoyed as a matter of favour or indulgence Issue: An annex which was rented out had two entrances, through the main residence (owner of the annex) and one which ran over waste ground. Were both entryways incorporated into the lease via easement under Wheeldon v Burrows? Outcome: an easier or more luxurious entryway is not needed for enjoyment of the property and cannot be implied into a lease for the sole purpose of convenience

International Tea Stores v Hobbes 1903; goes against Goldberg indulgence Issue: Landlord allowed his tenant to use a shortcut across his land, existed as a licence (personam). He then sold the leased premises to the tenant, there was question as to whether the licence to use the shortcut was allowed Outcome: the tenant has the right to use the shortcut as it has now taken effect as a legal easement, enforceable against a third-party purchaser

UNITY OF / LACK THEREOF UNITY OF OCCUPANCY SITUATIONS: Sovmots v Secretary of State; Issue: Maisonettes above an office complex were sold to London Borough Council and they were the sublet. The issue was If the maisonette apartments were houses under the definition and if the ancillary rights (rights essential to enjoyment of the property) were required to be specified in the compulsory purchase order Outcome: Wheeldon v Burrows was considered – finding that ancillary rights sought ti be acquired did not pass under the first rule of burrows

Wood v Waddington Issue: Mr Wood claimed a right of way over the land of their neighbour Mr Waddington - the rights were said to have arisen when the properties which were before in common ownership were divided up for sale Outcome: Mr Woods land did benefit from a right of way, under s.62 of the LPA 2925

DO EQUITIBLE EASEMENTS COMPLY WITH COMMON LAW REQUIREMENTS? Walsh V Lonsdale Issue: the claimant argues that under common law rules a lease has to be created by a deed to be legal and this had not been done and therefore the lease was not legal Outcome: COA found in favour of the defendant landlord under ‘equity looks on as done as which that ought to be done’

https://quizlet.com/21762073/land-easements-b-flash-cards/...