An easement, exercised for the benefit of the dominant estate, is not invalid merely because from the very nature of the right its exercise by the dominant estate confers some benefit upon other tenements.
The corporation of Godmanchester as owners of certain lands had for more than 200 years opened as of right the gates of certain sluices or locks belonging to the appellant upon the River Ouse in time of flood or likelihood of flood in order to prevent damage to those lands.
Held, that the easement was good and was none the worse because the exercise of it also benefited lands belonging to other persons ; and that the corporation could maintain their right either by s. 2 of the Prescription Act 1832 or by the fiction of a lost grant.
The decision of the Court of Appeal, [1896] 1 Ch
[1897] UKLawRpAC 41
England and Wales
Cited by:
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: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.668406 br>