(Supreme Court of the Northern Territory) – Hearing of preliminary point – whether purported grant of an easement an easement – easement has four essential criteria – easement does accommodate dominant tenement – the grant possessed all four characteristics – definition of easement – definition of recreation – no reason in law why easement cannot be granted for recreational purposes – intention of grantor to create large recreational area – encumbrance subject and conditional to registered easements – affects each section of land which receive benefit of the easement – test for an easement – recreational purpose is to be construed sensibly and reasonably in context of rural lakeside recreation – right conferred in respect of the grants of easements are in law easements
There was no reason in law why an easement could not be granted for recreational purposes.
Thomas J
(2000) 135 NTR 1, (2000) 156 FLR 1, [2000] NTSC 33
Austlii
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Regency Villas Title Ltd and Others v Diamond Resorts (Europe) Ltd and Another ChD 7-Dec-2015
Claim by time share owners for easements over neighbouring land. The easements were for various sporting rights and facilities.
Held: The Claimants were entitled to appropriate declaratory relief confirming that they have the rights they claim . .
Cited – Regency Villas Title Ltd and Others v Diamond Resorts (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 14-Nov-2018
A substantial historic estate had been divided. A development of one property was by way of leasehold timeshare properties enjoying rights over the surrounding large grounds with sporting facilities. A second development was created but wit freehold . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.581419