Millman v Ellis: CA 1996

The defendant had sold part of his land to the claimant. A right of way was granted over a lane. The purchaser asserted that he had the use of a lay-by on the lane which would otherwise be dangerous. The vendor said the plan did not include a right over the lay-by.
Held: The criteria for establishing a quasi-easement were satisfied. Both lane and layby were covered in one unbroken tarmac surace, and the use was therefore continuous and apparent. The contrasting safety with and without the use of the layby was significant. The absence of any specific mention of the layby was not inconsistent with an implied grant. The wording of the grant did not exclude such an implied right.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR
[1996] 71 P and CR 158
England and Wales
CitedWheeldon v Burrows CA 17-Jun-1879
Quasi-Easements granted on sale of part of Estate
S owned a workshop and an adjoining plot of land. The workshop had three windows looking out over the plot. The property was sold in separate lots at auction. The land was sold with no express reservation of any easements, and then similarly the . .
CitedSovmots Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 28-Apr-1977
The section in the 1881 Act does not apply to a quasi-easement because ‘When land is under one ownership one cannot speak in any intelligible sense of rights, or privileges, or easements being exercised over one part for the benefit of another. . .
CitedBorman v Griffith 1930
Maugham J said: ‘Where . . two properties belong to a single owner and are about to be granted and are separated by a common road, or where a plainly visible road exists over one for the apparent use of the other, and that road is necessary for the . .
CitedGregg v Richards 1926
. .

Cited by:
CitedHall and others v Save Newchurch Guinea Pigs (Campaign) and others QBD 17-Mar-2005
The claimants ran a guinea pig farm. They and their neighbours applied for injunctions and an exclusion zone to keep away the defendants who campaigned against the breeding of animals for research.
Held: The claimants had been subjected to a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.190031