Borman v Griffith: 1930

Maugham J said: ‘Where . . two properties belong to a single owner and are about to be granted and are separated by a common road, or where a plainly visible road exists over one for the apparent use of the other, and that road is necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of the property, the right to use the road will pass with the quasi-dominant tenement, unless that right is excluded by the terms of the contract that right is excluded.’

Judges:

Maugham J

Citations:

[1930] 1 Ch 493

Cited by:

CitedMillman v Ellis CA 1996
The defendant had sold part of his land to the claimant. A right of way was granted over a lane. The purchaser asserted that he had the use of a lay-by on the lane which would otherwise be dangerous. The vendor said the plan did not include a right . .
CitedCampbell and Another v Banks and Others CA 1-Feb-2011
The court considered the creation by section 62 of the 1925 Act automatically of easements when land was divided. The claimants owned land bounded on either side by properties beloinging to the respondents. The properties had once been in common . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.225887