Easements in English law - Knowledge (XXG)

298:, requiring an easement to be "absolute in possession or a term of years absolute", renders an easement incapable of existing as an interest at law. This includes easements for periods of uncertain duration, such as those ending when a particular event happens (the passing of planning permission over one of the tenements, for example). More controversially this category also includes easements for life, similarly incapable of existing at law. Although the topic has not arisen in the courts since at least 1925, it is difficult to show that as easement for life accommodated the dominant tenement, since it is inherently personal in nature. Rights purporting to be easements for life would, if they were rejected as easements, be licences instead and take effect through contract. The second category involves those cases where a 239:(although in that case, it operated to bring about an implied grant). The defendant leased a series of cellars to the claimant, requiring that they be used only as a restaurant. In order to comply with trading laws, however, the claimant was required by law, if he wished to use the cellars as a restaurant, to install ventilation ducts on the part of the building retained by the defendant. The court decided to imply a grant in that case because it was necessary for the carrying on the business required in the lease. As stated by Lord Atkinson in that case, it must be necessary, not merely reasonable or common in properties of that type or in that location. Where the right is reciprocal, for example support, then the rules of necessity are more relaxed. 132:

the land of building upon it. The operate of prescription to bring about a right of support of buildings as well as land in the form of an easement limits the operation of this natural right, however. Natural rights are only actionable after the fact – where damage has already occurred; the neighbouring landowner cannot be compelled to take preventative steps or give support in any particular fashion. The right to water from a stream or river is another natural right which may be extended through the operation of an easement. Easements in this area must also be considered in light of statutory regimes, particularly in the commercial context. There is also a public right to fish and navigate on the

187:

the documents of sale a clause in his favour, the scope of implied reservation is much smaller than that of implied grant. Where the vendor sells two neighbouring plots (as determined by time of contract, not of conveyance) both plots will fall under the rules of implied grant with regard to the other. Two plots sold at the same auction will fall under provision, for example, but a period of a month between contracts is too long. Implied easements act at law, not in equity, because the effect is the same as if the provision had been express. Any requirement of registration would clearly be incompatible with the concept of an implied easement, so none is applied.

346:. Where the servient land is unregistered, it is likely that the easement will not have to be registered against the dominant title, even if that is itself registered land. This has been disputed, however, and is significant because if legal would bind successors after first registration whereas an equitable easement would require registration as a land charge. Rule 250(1) allows for easements to arise in equity through prescription where the title is registered, but a right arising through prescription would be created as a legal easement and there seems to be no part of this process where the owner of the dominant tenement has a right in equity only. 212:. In these cases a right of way (and right to park respectively) granted as licences were held to have been legally transformed into an easement, following the conveyance of the impacted (servient) land. A limitation of the section is that it does not act to reserve easements impliedly; for example, a land owner in common ownership of two plots of land could not claim that, after selling one plot, his remaining plot should have an easement for right of light implied. Other circumstances where easements may be implied are where they are necessary for the enjoyment of land. 53:'s 2008 statistical finding that express easements exist over or under at least 65% of registered freehold titles. In many cases it is impossible for a land owner or tenant to access a public highway without an easement of a right of way over intervening land. The creation of easements is usually done expressly by deed, but easements may be implied where they are necessary, or would be reasonably expected to be held by a land owner, an approach which reduces legal fees but is not altogether uncontroversial, and has been the subject of recent reform proposals. 275:"Even if the claimant produces this evidence, it does not mean an easement has necessarily been acquired. Where the claim is based on common law prescription , the owner of the burdened land may be able to establish that the right could not possibly have been exercised from 1189 onwards. Where the claim is based on lost modern grant, the owner may be able to establish that nobody could have lawfully granted the easement. In these cases, there is no easement. 178:. Therefore, for an express legal easement (which will automatically bind all successors) to be formed rather than simply equitable it must have been created by deed. A legal easement must be registered against the dominant and servient land ("tenements"), if their titles are registered, to take effect. The benefit of legal easements pass automatically on the transfer of the dominant tenement or part of the dominant tenement. 1646: 262:

was not by force, stealth, or by permission, and continued for a period of twenty years. A land owner may be, but need not be, aware of such a use over his land. The claimant of the uses will see their claim rejected if that claimant has reason to believe that the land owner knows of and has objected to the claimed uses. It has been stated that:

43:, typically a right of use revocable at will. Details of the use, wording and history of certain rights is pivotal. Prime examples of express purported easements which will only be upheld on particular facts are the use of a communal garden with a public dimension, a neighbour's lavatory, or use of parts of another person's land for parking. 350:

mere licence could become a legal easement through the section, when the much closer equitable easement could not; on the other hand, construing the section in this way is unnecessary from the perspective of the purchaser, since a right enforceable in equity will be almost as useful as one enforceable at common law.

128:

can operate at either. An instrument that imposes a negative obligation on another tenement will normally be a restrictive covenant, although there are exceptions – the right to light, capable of being an easement, acts to prevent the owner of the servient tenement from acting inconsistently with it.

230:, the Court of Appeal decided that the necessity requirement was based on the presumed intention of the parties at the time of the grant. It should therefore follow that subsequent events cannot destroy an easement arising by implied reservation, although one pre-Victorian case suggested that it might. 443:

The person entitled to the easement must not only have stopped exercising it, but also to have “demonstrated a fixed intention never at any time thereafter to assert the right himself or to attempt to transmit it to anyone else” The circumstances that are claimed to amount to abandonment must be set

284:

The benefit of a legal easement will pass to the next owner of that tenement without express words. This was the position of the common law and is now reflected in both sections 62 and 187 of the Law of Property Act 1925. If the dominant tenement is leased, even if only at equity, the benefit of the

96:

Next, it must be shown that the right is connected with the enjoyment of the dominant tenement in some way. It is important to this end that the right must benefit an individual in their capacity as a land owner, and not merely form a personal right. For example, it has been judicially stated that a

410:

In New Zealand, the law reflects the older alternate legal vocabulary in that "surrender" is often used. In England and Wales it had an easements application synonymous with release. Surrender is generally, for clarity, confined to a class of ending of leases, occupational rights, goods and similar

261:

Where a right has long been physically enjoyed by a land owner, it may be upheld ("prescribed") as an easement with or without a dispute with the owner of the impacted land ("servient tenement"). To have done so it must meet the criteria of an easement, and the claimant must be able to show the use

223:

The first of these categories covers those cases where the land would be landlocked but for the proposed easement, but seems to extend no further than that. It has long been the case that any access, even if by water or inconvenient, will be enough to defeat a claim of necessity, although there are

186:

Easements may also arise by implication where a vendor sells one plot of land but retains another neighbouring plot. Easements may arise in favour of the retained plot (reservation) or the sold plot (grant). Because a presumption operates that a vendor will have had ample opportunity to insert into

131:

Easements are also separate from natural rights, which operate universally and do not have to be created. Some natural rights appear similar to easements. For example, there is a natural right to support of one's land. This does not, however, extend to buildings upon the land or the consequences on

139:

Covenants are also separate to public rights. These include rights acquired as of custom – one being, for example, the right to hold a market in a particular location – thus acting in a similar way to an easement. However, in order to show a right as of custom it must be shown that the

127:

and the court will not allow the creation of an easement where the right is in substance a restrictive covenant. Showing a restrictive covenant exists requires demonstrating different criteria are met and a restrictive covenant operates only in equity and not at the common law, whereas an easement

434:

There must be unification of both ownership and possession of the dominant land and of the servient land. The rights may by continued use fall, that is evolve, to being quasi-easements and then be revived depending on the terms of a re-splitting of the title i.e. the later transfer of a relevant

349:

The benefit of an equitable easement passes with the transfer of the dominant tenement. Whether section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925 can operate to turn an equitable easement into a legal easement upon conveyance of the dominant tenement is unclear. On the one hand, it would seem odd that a

108:

The most problematic characteristic of an easement is that it must be capable of forming a grant by deed. The right must therefore be certain and definite in its purpose, and more importantly, that the courts are willing to recognise it as a right capable of being an easement. Many claimed rights

92:

The first requirement – that there must be two distinct plots of land affected – is central to the definition of an easement. A right of way granted to an individual is granted in their capacity as a land owner; if a right of way is granted to an individual who is not a land owner, it is merely a

271:

statement of truth or statutory declaration must set out in detail the use and enjoyment relied upon to substantiate the claim. The right claimed must be one that could have been lawfully granted. The Land Registry has form ST4, for a typical statement of truth related to prescriptive easements.

402:

any other party whose interest was noted in the register for the dominant land and who would be adversely affected by the release. For example, if there was a contract for sale noted in the register for the dominant land, the person having the benefit of the contract would have to be a party or

26:

that a person has over another's land. Rights recognised as easements range from very widespread forms of rights of way, most rights to use service conduits such as telecommunications cables, power supply lines, supply pipes and drains, rights to use communal gardens and rights of light to more

270:

Such rights can be registered. The claimant must produce evidence, in a statement of truth or statutory declaration or a chain of such documents covering previous owners, of continuous use as of right, by or on behalf of and against the freehold owners, for a period of at least 20 years. The

148:

which laid down a system of exclusive registration – all rights must now be registered if they are to operate. Thus new rights of common can only take effect by express grant. Rights of way often form the subject of easements, but public rights of way take effect without the need for a

306:

will operate to bring about an easement, since "equity regards as done those things which ought to be done". The third category is where the grantor holds only an equitable interest himself. The most common occasion where this will happen is where an easement is created by operation of a

330:

have been offered in support of their existence; however, some commentators prefer to analyse these cases as giving rise to a right distinct from an easement or a legal easement respectively. This makes an important difference when it comes to binding third-party purchasers.

365:

or equitable easements. Where the servient tenement is registered, the registration of an equitable easement at the Land Registry can take place through mere notice or caution and will then bind purchasers. Alternatively, it will still bind purchasers if it constitutes an

109:

fail this last criterion, for example, rights which require positive action by the owner of a servient tenement are unlikely to be granted, as are negative rights, which restrict the use of land. Rights which are excessive in nature are equally unlikely to be upheld. In

224:

signs that courts might be more willing in the future to consider a wider approach, perhaps only vehicular access. A claim of necessity will not be defeated by an access provided by revokable licence, or where a building would need to be demolished to use it. In

195:

There are several circumstances where the grant of an easement may be implied, usually occurring on the conveyance of land. Where land is transferred, subject to contrary intention, existing easements are automatically conveyed under Section 62 of the

104:

An easement can not be recognised where it the dominant and servient tenement are under common ownership. However, rights may be recognised as 'quasi-easements', which can then be implied as full easements upon the conveyance of the land in question.

425:

Where a registered lease has terminated and an application is made in the standard Land Registry Application Form to close the title, completion of the application will mean removal of any entry in respect of the benefit of an appurtenant easement.

435:

portion of the unified land, or effectively be revived by necessity. Assuming not, or in all cases at any time during unified ownership, entries seemingly confirming an easement at the Land Registry can at any time after unification be removed.

34:

Some classes, types, of easement are heavily constrained — the courts of England and Wales will only uphold these as easements subject to wide-reaching public policy, chiefly property rights interference, tests they have laid down in

338:, as is now common, there are further circumstances where an equitable easement will arise. Where both the dominant and servient tenements are registered, easements must be registered against both titles under the terms of the 293:

Equitable easements have the same basic requirements as easements at law concerning their subject matter. Easements are recognised as arising in equity in at least three circumstances. The first is where section 1(2)(b) of the

311:. Where there is a will, legal title vests in the executors of the estate until transferred to the deceased's personal representatives, but any devised interests operate at equity from the time of disposition. 376:, section 70(1)(c) of the Land Registration Act and rule 258 of the Land Registration Rules 1925 will operate to ensure that almost all equitable easements constitute overriding interests. 97:

right of way over a plot of land in Northumberland to an estate in Kent would not form the requisite benefit, the proximity of the two pieces of land being too remote. It was recognised in

220:

For reserved easements to be implied, they must be necessary either for the use of the land in general or for the use which the parties together intend the land to be put.

200:. Additionally – and controversially in some cases – 'precarious' rights, such as licenses or personal rights may be transformed into legal easements, as demonstrated in 101:

however that an easement need not be over an adjacent property, though there must clearly be some reasonable connection in which the dominant tenement can be benefitted.

1306: 115:

a claim to store unlimited vehicles on a neighbour's land failed, with the interference and right claimed being too great to be allowed as an easement.

730: 419:

This is the formal, Latin-based legal language for the ending of a lease which, as in most leases, had the boon of an easement or set of easements.

1629: 783: 154: 389:

This is a document usually headed ‘deed of release’ (or similar), and optionally with ‘of easement’ or ‘of easements’ appended to the title.

39:. Similar tests apply to the implication of easements. If they fail on any of these tests the right claimed may be interpreted as a "mere" 285:

legal easement will still pass to the lesee and it will remain an easement at law albeit one enforceable by the lessee in equity only.

235: 853: 648: 342:. Failure to do so will render them easements in equity only, although they will still bind purchasers under rule 258 of the 1665: 955: 723: 601: 326: 124: 202: 392:

All interested parties in the benefit of the easement must be parties to the deed or consent to the release, including:

865: 634: 1516:

UK Government: Land Registry Practice Guide 62 at 12.2.2: Determination of lease to which the easement is appurtenant

967: 320: 932: 586: 339: 28: 343: 82:

The easement must accommodate the dominant tenement, that is, be connected with its enjoyment and for its benefit;

532: 61:

Whilst an easement is essentially a right over another's land, any right claimed as an easement must satisfy the

266:"A landowner who wishes to stop the acquisition of prescriptive rights must not acquiesce and suffer in silence" 170:

Section 1(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 states that easements are an interest capable of being legal, with

889: 830: 716: 606: 579: 308: 295: 197: 696: 594: 226: 1650: 641: 548: 302:

contract to create an easement has taken effect but the easement has not been granted. Here, the regular

174:

52 of that Act stating that all conveyances (transfers of interests in land) will be void unless created

922: 912: 819: 688: 664: 525: 372: 358: 256: 361:. Equitable easements arising by virtue of a contract to grant an easement are registerable as either 1001: 807: 771: 680: 540: 478: 462: 406:

the servient land owner, perhaps, if as is rarer than most instances the easement grants them benefit

362: 315: 299: 111: 67: 626: 572: 518: 486: 367: 354: 841: 656: 502: 153:, rights over common land and open country are also granted to the public, now regulated by the 27:

strained and novel forms. All types are subject to general rules and constraints. As one of the

335: 72: 996: 981: 747: 494: 399:

any chargee (usually termed the mortgagee) of the dominant land (land enjoying the easement)

303: 145: 23: 1525:

UK Government: Land Registry Practice Guide 62 at 12.2.4: Unity of ownership and occupation

1602:

DG Barnsley, 'Equitable easements - sixty years on' (1999) 115 Law Quarterly Review 89-118

877: 672: 619: 353:

An equitable easement when the servient tenement is unregistered is enforceable against a

248: 1645: 46:

In all cases the neighbouring, impacted, "servient" land does not have to be adjoining.

1621: 1500: 901: 795: 556: 510: 208: 150: 50: 1659: 759: 470: 252: 1325:

UK Government: Land Registry: Practice guide 52: easements claimed by prescription.

971: 452:

An easement can be expressly, or impliedly, extinguished or modified by statute.

396:

the registered proprietor/owner of the dominant land (land enjoying the easement)

140:

use dates back to at least 1189 and so these are rare. More common are rights of

1649:

This article contains quotations from this source, which is available under the

943: 564: 141: 62: 133: 36: 88:

The right claimed must be capable of forming the subject-matter of a grant.

1605:

P Luther, ‘Easements and Exclusive Possession’ (1996) 16 Legal Studies 51

1490:

UK Government: Land Registry Practice Guide 62 at 12.2.1: Deed of release

612: 1611:

E Paton and G. Seabourne, ‘Can’t Get There from Here?’ Conveyancer 127

1564:

Subsection (2) of Section 4 of the Requisitioned Land and War Works Act

411:

rights in English law as has tended towards a more monetary character.

40: 1546:

UK Government: Land Registry Practice Guide 62 at 12.2.3: Abandonment

708: 422:

Easements granted in leases normally come to an end with the lease.

1608:

B Ziff and M. Litman, ‘Easements and Possession’ Conveyancer 296

1555:

UK Government: Land Registry Practice Guide 62 at 12.2.5: Statute

712: 1042:

Law Commission Consultation Paper No. 186, 2008, paragraph 1.3

1626:

Making Land Work: Easements, Covenants and Profits a Prendre

314:

A fourth category, equitable easements arising by virtue of

415:

Determination of lease to which the easement is appurtenant

85:

The dominant and servient owners must be different persons;

31:

express, express legal easements must be created by deed.

444:

out in a statutory declaration or Statement of Truth.

357:

only when properly registered under the terms of the

75:

J laid out essential characteristics of an easement:

79:There must be a dominant and a servient tenement; 136:, although this is limited in several respects. 1512: 1510: 1351: 1349: 1243: 1241: 1165: 1163: 1018: 1016: 16:Rights in English land law over another's land 724: 8: 1188: 1186: 1184: 49:The necessity of easements is shown by the 731: 717: 709: 430:Merger, unity of possession and ownership 1501:"Extinguish an easement from How to Law" 1481:Barnsley (1999). pp. 114–115. 1445:Barnsley (1999). pp. 111–112. 1427:Barnsley (1999). pp. 109–110. 1409:Barnsley (1999). pp. 108–109. 1400:Barnsley (1999). pp. 104–108. 1391:Barnsley (1999). pp. 102–103. 1321: 1319: 233:The second category includes cases like 1012: 1364:Barnsley (1999). pp. 99 100. 784:London and Blenheim Ltd v Ladbroke Ltd 155:Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 1169:Smith (2011). pp. 492–493. 1148:Smith (2011). pp. 491–492. 1139:Smith (2011). pp. 491, 495. 1130:Smith (2011). pp. 490–491. 7: 602:Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992 65:definition, outlined in the case of 1265:Smith (2011). pp. 508–9. 1247:Smith (2011). pp. 507–8. 1211:International Tea Stores Co v Hobbs 1201:Smith (2011). pp. 506–7. 203:International Tea Stores Co v Hobbs 236:Wong v Beaumont Property Trust Ltd 14: 144:. These are now regulated by the 1644: 635:International Tea Stores v Hobbs 968:R (Barkas) v North Yorkshire CC 370:". As confirmed in the case of 171: 854:Wong v Beaumont Property Trust 649:Wong v Beaumont Property Trust 321:ER Ives Investments Ltd v High 318:, is contested. Cases such as 1: 1472:Barnsley (1999). p. 114. 1463:Barnsley (1999). p. 113. 1454:Barnsley (1999). p. 112. 1436:Barnsley (1999). p. 110. 1418:Barnsley (1999). p. 109. 1382:Barnsley (1999). p. 101. 1373:Barnsley (1999). p. 100. 1343:Barnsley (1999). p. 115. 1334:Barnsley (1999). p. 111. 956:Crabb v Arun District Council 587:Titchmarsh v Royston Water Co 327:Crabb v Arun District Council 1651:Open Government Licence v3.0 1355:Barnsley (1999). p. 98. 1296:(1988) 56 P & CR 8 at 20 1073:(1862) 12 CB (NS) 91, at 115 1023:Re Ellenborough Park Ch 131 935:s 27(2)(a) and Sch 3, para 3 385:Deed of release or surrender 344:Land Registration Rules 1925 123:Easements are distinct from 119:Comparison with other rights 57:Characteristics of easements 1311:R v Sunderland City Council 866:Pwllbach Colliery v Woodman 280:Transfer of legal easements 1682: 1274:Smith (2011). p. 509. 1256:Smith (2011). p. 508. 1235:Smith (2011). p. 507. 1192:Smith (2011). p. 506. 1178:Smith (2011). p. 493. 1157:Smith (2011). p. 492. 933:Land Registration Act 2002 439:Abandonment allowed by law 340:Land Registration Act 1925 246: 29:formalities in English law 978: 964: 952: 940: 930: 920: 910: 898: 886: 874: 862: 850: 838: 828: 816: 804: 792: 780: 768: 756: 744: 533:Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd 149:covenant. As well as the 1535:Tehidy Minerals v Norman 890:Green v Lord Somerleyton 831:Law of Property Act 1925 700:(1989) 58 P & CR 163 697:Huckvale v Aegean Hotels 692:(1995) 69 P & CR 288 684:(1992) 66 P & CR 246 607:Law of Property Act 1925 580:Law of Property Act 1925 380:Termination of easements 309:testamentary disposition 300:specifically enforceable 296:Law of Property Act 1925 198:Law of Property Act 1925 20:Easements in English law 595:Nickerson v Barraclough 544:(1843) 2 My & K 517 227:Nickerson v Barraclough 905:(2000) 80 P&CR 108 763:(1863) 2 H & C 121 630:(1997) 74 P &CR 42 474:(1863) 2 H & C 121 277: 268: 22:are certain rights in 1653:. © Crown copyright. 1537:EWCA, per Buckley LJ. 923:Land Charges Act 1972 913:Prescription Act 1832 820:Das v Linden Mews Ltd 642:Conveyancing Act 1881 549:Dyce v Lady James Hay 526:Prescription Act 1832 506:(1862) 13 CB (NS) 841 359:Land Charges Act 1972 273: 264: 257:Prescription Act 1832 161:Creation of easements 125:restrictive covenants 1666:English property law 1313:1 All ER 160, at 181 1110:Copeland v Greenhalf 1002:English property law 833:ss 1(2) 62 and 65(1) 808:Moncrieff v Jamieson 772:Re Ellenborough Park 576:(1881) 6 App Cas 740 479:Re Ellenborough Park 463:Moncrieff v Jamieson 316:proprietary estoppel 304:principles of equity 112:Copeland v Greenhalf 99:Re Ellenborough Park 68:Re Ellenborough Park 1222:As was the case in 368:overriding interest 355:purchaser for value 289:Equitable easements 216:Implied reservation 1294:Newnham v Willison 1224:Wheeldon v Burrows 842:Wheeldon v Burrows 751:(1610) 9 Co Rep 57 739:Cases on easements 689:Bosomworth v Faber 665:Wheeler v Saunders 657:Wheeldon v Burrows 498:(1610) 9 Co Rep 57 373:Thatcher v Douglas 1071:Bailey v Stephens 992: 991: 845:(1879) 12 Ch D 31 660:(1879) 12 Ch D 31 552:(1852) 1 Macq 305 514:(1890) 25 QBD 481 1673: 1648: 1565: 1562: 1556: 1553: 1547: 1544: 1538: 1532: 1526: 1523: 1517: 1514: 1505: 1504: 1497: 1491: 1488: 1482: 1479: 1473: 1470: 1464: 1461: 1455: 1452: 1446: 1443: 1437: 1434: 1428: 1425: 1419: 1416: 1410: 1407: 1401: 1398: 1392: 1389: 1383: 1380: 1374: 1371: 1365: 1362: 1356: 1353: 1344: 1341: 1335: 1332: 1326: 1323: 1314: 1303: 1297: 1290: 1284: 1283:Thompson, p. 519 1281: 1275: 1272: 1266: 1263: 1257: 1254: 1248: 1245: 1236: 1233: 1227: 1220: 1214: 1208: 1202: 1199: 1193: 1190: 1179: 1176: 1170: 1167: 1158: 1155: 1149: 1146: 1140: 1137: 1131: 1128: 1122: 1121:Thompson, p. 503 1119: 1113: 1107: 1101: 1100:Thompson, p. 502 1098: 1092: 1091:Thompson, p. 500 1089: 1083: 1082:Thompson, p. 499 1080: 1074: 1069:Per Byles J, in 1067: 1061: 1060:Thompson, p. 498 1058: 1052: 1049: 1043: 1040: 1034: 1033:Thompson, p. 497 1031: 1025: 1020: 997:English land law 982:English land law 733: 726: 719: 710: 590:(1900) 81 LT 673 363:estate contracts 182:Implied easement 173: 146:Commons Act 2006 24:English land law 1681: 1680: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1656: 1655: 1638: 1583:Modern Land Law 1573: 1568: 1563: 1559: 1554: 1550: 1545: 1541: 1533: 1529: 1524: 1520: 1515: 1508: 1499: 1498: 1494: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1476: 1471: 1467: 1462: 1458: 1453: 1449: 1444: 1440: 1435: 1431: 1426: 1422: 1417: 1413: 1408: 1404: 1399: 1395: 1390: 1386: 1381: 1377: 1372: 1368: 1363: 1359: 1354: 1347: 1342: 1338: 1333: 1329: 1324: 1317: 1304: 1300: 1292:Per Kerr LJ in 1291: 1287: 1282: 1278: 1273: 1269: 1264: 1260: 1255: 1251: 1246: 1239: 1234: 1230: 1221: 1217: 1209: 1205: 1200: 1196: 1191: 1182: 1177: 1173: 1168: 1161: 1156: 1152: 1147: 1143: 1138: 1134: 1129: 1125: 1120: 1116: 1108: 1104: 1099: 1095: 1090: 1086: 1081: 1077: 1068: 1064: 1059: 1055: 1050: 1046: 1041: 1037: 1032: 1028: 1021: 1014: 1010: 993: 988: 974: 960: 948: 936: 926: 916: 906: 894: 882: 878:Kent v Kavanagh 870: 858: 846: 834: 824: 812: 800: 788: 776: 764: 752: 740: 737: 707: 681:Benn v Hardinge 673:Kent v Kavanagh 620:Crabb v Arun DC 541:Keppel v Bailey 458: 450: 441: 432: 417: 387: 382: 291: 282: 259: 249:Time immemorial 245: 218: 193: 184: 168: 163: 121: 59: 17: 12: 11: 5: 1679: 1677: 1669: 1668: 1658: 1657: 1642: 1641: 1637: 1636:External links 1634: 1633: 1632: 1630:Law Com No 327 1622:Law Commission 1618: 1617: 1613: 1612: 1609: 1606: 1603: 1599: 1598: 1594: 1593: 1586: 1578: 1577: 1572: 1569: 1567: 1566: 1557: 1548: 1539: 1527: 1518: 1506: 1492: 1483: 1474: 1465: 1456: 1447: 1438: 1429: 1420: 1411: 1402: 1393: 1384: 1375: 1366: 1357: 1345: 1336: 1327: 1315: 1298: 1285: 1276: 1267: 1258: 1249: 1237: 1228: 1215: 1203: 1194: 1180: 1171: 1159: 1150: 1141: 1132: 1123: 1114: 1102: 1093: 1084: 1075: 1062: 1053: 1051:Ch 131, at 140 1044: 1035: 1026: 1011: 1009: 1006: 1005: 1004: 999: 990: 989: 979: 976: 975: 965: 962: 961: 953: 950: 949: 941: 938: 937: 931: 928: 927: 925:s 2(5)(d)(iii) 921: 918: 917: 911: 908: 907: 902:Hair v Gillman 899: 896: 895: 887: 884: 883: 875: 872: 871: 863: 860: 859: 851: 848: 847: 839: 836: 835: 829: 826: 825: 817: 814: 813: 805: 802: 801: 796:Phipps v Pears 793: 790: 789: 781: 778: 777: 769: 766: 765: 757: 754: 753: 745: 742: 741: 738: 736: 735: 728: 721: 713: 706: 703: 702: 701: 693: 685: 677: 669: 661: 653: 645: 639: 631: 627:Payne v Inwood 623: 616: 610: 604: 599: 591: 583: 582:, section 1(2) 577: 573:Dalton v Angus 569: 561: 557:Phipps v Pears 553: 545: 537: 529: 523: 519:Cable v Bryant 515: 511:Bass v Gregory 507: 499: 491: 483: 475: 467: 457: 454: 449: 446: 440: 437: 431: 428: 416: 413: 408: 407: 404: 400: 397: 386: 383: 381: 378: 334:Where land is 290: 287: 281: 278: 244: 241: 217: 214: 209:Hair v Gillman 192: 189: 183: 180: 167: 164: 162: 159: 151:public highway 120: 117: 90: 89: 86: 83: 80: 58: 55: 51:Law Commission 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1678: 1667: 1664: 1663: 1661: 1654: 1652: 1647: 1640: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1623: 1620: 1619: 1615: 1614: 1610: 1607: 1604: 1601: 1600: 1596: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1584: 1580: 1579: 1575: 1574: 1570: 1561: 1558: 1552: 1549: 1543: 1540: 1536: 1531: 1528: 1522: 1519: 1513: 1511: 1507: 1502: 1496: 1493: 1487: 1484: 1478: 1475: 1469: 1466: 1460: 1457: 1451: 1448: 1442: 1439: 1433: 1430: 1424: 1421: 1415: 1412: 1406: 1403: 1397: 1394: 1388: 1385: 1379: 1376: 1370: 1367: 1361: 1358: 1352: 1350: 1346: 1340: 1337: 1331: 1328: 1322: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1302: 1299: 1295: 1289: 1286: 1280: 1277: 1271: 1268: 1262: 1259: 1253: 1250: 1244: 1242: 1238: 1232: 1229: 1225: 1219: 1216: 1212: 1207: 1204: 1198: 1195: 1189: 1187: 1185: 1181: 1175: 1172: 1166: 1164: 1160: 1154: 1151: 1145: 1142: 1136: 1133: 1127: 1124: 1118: 1115: 1111: 1106: 1103: 1097: 1094: 1088: 1085: 1079: 1076: 1072: 1066: 1063: 1057: 1054: 1048: 1045: 1039: 1036: 1030: 1027: 1024: 1019: 1017: 1013: 1007: 1003: 1000: 998: 995: 994: 987: 983: 977: 973: 970: 969: 963: 958: 957: 951: 946: 945: 939: 934: 929: 924: 919: 914: 909: 904: 903: 897: 892: 891: 885: 880: 879: 873: 868: 867: 861: 856: 855: 849: 844: 843: 837: 832: 827: 822: 821: 815: 810: 809: 803: 798: 797: 791: 786: 785: 779: 774: 773: 767: 762: 761: 760:Hill v Tupper 755: 750: 749: 748:Aldred's Case 743: 734: 729: 727: 722: 720: 715: 714: 711: 704: 699: 698: 694: 691: 690: 686: 683: 682: 678: 675: 674: 670: 667: 666: 662: 659: 658: 654: 651: 650: 646: 643: 640: 637: 636: 632: 629: 628: 624: 622: 621: 617: 615:Sch 3, para 3 614: 611: 608: 605: 603: 600: 597: 596: 592: 589: 588: 584: 581: 578: 575: 574: 570: 567: 566: 562: 559: 558: 554: 551: 550: 546: 543: 542: 538: 535: 534: 530: 527: 524: 521: 520: 516: 513: 512: 508: 505: 504: 500: 497: 496: 495:Aldred's Case 492: 489: 488: 487:Pugh v Savage 484: 481: 480: 476: 473: 472: 471:Hill v Tupper 468: 465: 464: 460: 459: 455: 453: 447: 445: 438: 436: 429: 427: 423: 420: 414: 412: 405: 401: 398: 395: 394: 393: 390: 384: 379: 377: 375: 374: 369: 364: 360: 356: 351: 347: 345: 341: 337: 332: 329: 328: 323: 322: 317: 312: 310: 305: 301: 297: 288: 286: 279: 276: 272: 267: 263: 258: 254: 253:Legal fiction 250: 242: 240: 238: 237: 231: 229: 228: 221: 215: 213: 211: 210: 205: 204: 199: 191:Implied grant 190: 188: 181: 179: 177: 166:Express grant 165: 160: 158: 156: 152: 147: 143: 137: 135: 129: 126: 118: 116: 114: 113: 106: 102: 100: 94: 87: 84: 81: 78: 77: 76: 74: 70: 69: 64: 56: 54: 52: 47: 44: 42: 38: 32: 30: 25: 21: 1643: 1625: 1590:Property Law 1589: 1582: 1581:M Thompson, 1560: 1551: 1542: 1534: 1530: 1521: 1495: 1486: 1477: 1468: 1459: 1450: 1441: 1432: 1423: 1414: 1405: 1396: 1387: 1378: 1369: 1360: 1339: 1330: 1310: 1301: 1293: 1288: 1279: 1270: 1261: 1252: 1231: 1223: 1218: 1210: 1206: 1197: 1174: 1153: 1144: 1135: 1126: 1117: 1109: 1105: 1096: 1087: 1078: 1070: 1065: 1056: 1047: 1038: 1029: 1022: 985: 966: 954: 942: 900: 893:EWCA Civ 198 888: 881:EWCA Civ 162 876: 864: 852: 840: 823:EWCA Civ 590 818: 806: 794: 787:4 All ER 157 782: 770: 758: 746: 695: 687: 679: 671: 668:2 All ER 697 663: 655: 647: 633: 625: 618: 609:, section 62 593: 585: 571: 563: 555: 547: 539: 536:2 All ER 426 531: 517: 509: 501: 493: 485: 477: 469: 461: 451: 442: 433: 424: 421: 418: 409: 391: 388: 371: 352: 348: 333: 325: 319: 313: 292: 283: 274: 269: 265: 260: 243:Prescription 234: 232: 225: 222: 219: 207: 201: 194: 185: 175: 169: 138: 130: 122: 110: 107: 103: 98: 95: 91: 66: 60: 48: 45: 33: 19: 18: 1307:Lord Walker 944:Crow v Wood 565:Crow v Wood 503:Webb v Bird 1585:(OUP 2009) 1571:References 959:EWCA Civ 7 448:By statute 336:registered 247:See also: 73:Danckwerts 63:common law 1588:R Smith, 986:easements 598:2 WLR 773 134:foreshore 93:license. 37:precedent 1660:Category 1597:Articles 1213:2 Ch 165 857:1 BE 173 811:UKHL 42. 705:See also 652:1 BE 173 638:2 Ch 165 613:LRA 2002 522:1 Ch 259 490:2 QB 373 466:UKHL 42. 456:Case law 403:consent. 71:. Here, 1628:(2011) 1616:Reports 972:UKSC 31 947:1 QB 77 799:1 QB 76 568:1 QB 77 560:1 QB 76 176:by deed 41:licence 1592:(2011) 1112:Ch 488 915:ss 2-3 869:AC 624 775:Ch 131 482:Ch 131 255:, and 142:common 1576:Books 1008:Notes 1305:Per 984:and 980:see 676:Ch 1 324:and 206:and 1309:in 644:s 6 528:s 3 1662:: 1624:, 1509:^ 1348:^ 1318:^ 1240:^ 1183:^ 1162:^ 1015:^ 251:, 172:s. 157:. 1503:. 1226:. 732:e 725:t 718:v 366:"

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index