Clark v Cogge: 1607

A grantee of land shall have the benefit of an implied right of way of the grantor’s land where necessary: ‘the case was, the one sells land and afterwards the vendee, by reason thereof, claims a way over the plaintiff’s land, there being no other convenient way adjoining: and, whether this were a lawful claim was the question. And it was resolved without argument, but the way it remained, and that he might well justify the using thereof, because it is a thing of necessity; for otherwise he could not have any profit of his land: et e converso, if a man hath four closes lying together, and sells three of them, reserving the middle close, and hath not any way thereto but through one of those which he sold, although he reserved not any way, yet he shall have it, as reserved unto him by the law; and there is not any extinguishment of a way by having both lands.’


(1607) Cro Jac 170, [1607] 79 ER 149, [1791] EngR 208, (1791) Cro Jac 170, (1791) 79 ER 149 (A)



Cited by:

CitedAdealon International Proprietary Ltd v London Borough of Merton ChD 12-Apr-2006
The claimant had bought land originally bought from the defendant, but after a long series of events, the only available access was over the retained land. It sought a right of way of necessity.
Held: At the time of the grant, other access was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.253270