A right of way was granted for all purposes connected with the use and enjoyment of the dominant tenement as agricultural land. The dominant tenement was used for the purpose of storing timber felled on neighbouring land and the question was whether the right of way could be used for the purpose of removing that timber.
Held: It could not. Morritt LJ said: ‘If the storage was a separate operation it was not an agricultural use of (the dominant tenement). If it was not an operation separate from the felling of the timber, then the use of the right of way for the removal of the timber felled at (the neighbouring tenement) was in substance for the accommodation of (the neighbouring tenement). Either way, the use of the right of way was not authorised by the terms of the grant.’
Judges:
Morritt, Simon Brown LJJ, Sir Brian Neil
Citations:
[1998] 09 EG 148
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Harris v Flower CA 1904
The servient land-owner alleged an excessive user by which it was attempted to impose an additional burden on the servient tenement in the use of a right of way for obtaining access to a factory erected partly on the land to which the right of way . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.523881