Daniel v Hanslip: 1672

‘if a man hath common appurtenant to a messuage and land for certain number of beasts, he may alien the same; aliter if it be common for all his beasts levant and couchant upon the land, he cannot by his alienation sever that from the land.’ It was held that: ‘ . . a common appurtenant may be severed and granted, because nothing restrains it to cattle used upon the land also if it be for cattle levant and couchant it may be granted; with the land and not without it.’


Hale CJ


(1672) 2 Lev 67, 3 Keble 66


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWhite v Taylor (No 2) ChD 1969
The alienation of grazing rights for a fixed number of beasts cannot prejudice the residual interest of the owner of the servient common. Whoever the grazing right belongs to, the number of beasts that can be grazed upon the common pursuant to the . .
CitedBettison and others v Langton and others HL 17-May-2001
A right to pasture animals on a common had been levant and couchant, and as such was inalienable as a separate asset from the land where the animals were kept. The right was registered under the Act, and was thereby transformed into a right to graze . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.191142