Supreme Court of Canada – The Court considered an easement allowing free access to the waters of the bay and recognised as easements the grant in favour of residential lots on a development plan of rights to use ‘foreshore reserves’ separating the lots from a bay
The Supreme Court stated in its declaratory order that ‘the right so granted includes the right to promenade freely across the whole of the ‘Foreshore Reserves’ and not merely to cross directly from the edge or front of Lot 38 to the waters of Boundary Bay’
(1978) 86 DLR 609, [1978] 2 SCR 1039
Canlii
Canada
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 Another CA 4-Apr-2017
Can a recreational purpose underlie an easement
The court considered the validity of easements of recreational facilities. A property had been developed with timeshare leases within a substantial and attractive grounds area. Later a second development was created but with freehold interests, but . .
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.581347