The plaintiff complained that he had an easement over the defendants land for the supply of water, including the right to connect into the mains on the defendant’s land. The defendant said that the right was only to connect to the mains directly.
Held: There was a crucial distinction between the right to a supply of water; and a right to an uninterrupted passage of water. A right of the passage of water through the service connection serving the property was not a right to be supplied with water by the servient owner at his expense, but to the uninterrupted passage of water and no more. It confers no right to insist upon the servient owner allowing water to enter his pipes. If, however, water does reach the pipes by any means whatever, that water must be permitted to pass through the pipes on the servient land so as to reach the dominant land. The servient owner is not bound to ensure that any water does reach the system, but if it does he cannot prevent its onward passage to the dominant tenement without being liable for action for interference with the easement.
Judges:
Browne-Wilkinson, Griffiths LJ, Sir George Waller
Citations:
(1985) 50 PandCR 9, [1985] EWCA Civ 7
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Schwann v Cotton CA 1916
Blackacre, Greenacre and Whiteacre had all formerly been in common ownership and the owner of Whiteacre denied that Blackacre was entitled to an easement to pass the water from Greenacre to Blackacre.
Held: The Will which effected’ the . .
Cited by:
Explained – Duffy v Lamb (T/a Vic Lamb Developments) CA 10-Apr-1997
The plaintiff sought damages after the interruption of the electricity supply from neighbouring land by the defendant. An easement was established, but the defendant wanted the plaintiff to make his own arrangements for connection. The judge had . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Utilities
Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262656