Sweet and Another v Sommer and Another: ChD 25 Jun 2004

Part of land had been sold off. By oversight no right of way had been taken in favour of the retained land. The dominant owner argued that by demolition of a building a means of access could be found and that therefore no right of way by necessity arose.
Held: It was clearly envisaged by all parties that the building was not to be demolished. Ther was no direct authority on the issue, but the doctrine of necessity had to be read in the context of the actual situation. An implied reservation of the right of way existed.
Hart J
Times 25-Aug-2004, [2004] EWHC 1504 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedOsborn v Wise 1837
Easement of necessity for use arising after grant but predictable. . .
CitedManjang v Drammeh PC 1990
1-1-1990
The owner of a strip of land alongside the River Gambia and which was ‘regularly and without inconvenience’ accessed by his customers from the river failed in a contention that his land was ‘landlocked’ so as to give him a way of necessity over . .
CitedCorporation of London v Riggs CA 1880
The court considered whether a right of way of necessity had been granted: ‘the real question I have to decide is this – whether, on a grant of land wholly surrounding a close, the implied grant, or re grant, of a right of way by the grantee to the . .
CitedSerff v Acton Local Board ChD 1886
A right of way of necessity may be implied for purposes contemplated at the date of the grant but not yet implemented. . .
CitedMRA Engineering Ltd v Trimster Co Ltd CA 1987
The conveyancing process had left a house in Dorking without any access to the public highway otherwise than by public footpaths to its side and rear. The question was whether a vehicular way over land which had been conveyed to the defendants had . .
CitedBrown v Allabastor 1887
. .
CitedCelsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd ChD 1985
An equitable easement (a right of way), which was not protected by any entry on the register, was a right openly exercised and enjoyed as appurtenant, in this case to a garage, and it adversely affected registered land as an overriding interest. The . .
CitedUnion Lighterage Company v London Graving Dock Company CA 1902
Stirling LJ said: ‘in my opinion an easement of necessity means an easement without which the property retained cannot be used at all, and not one merely necessary to the reasonable enjoyment of that property.’
Romer LJ said that enjoyment of a . .
CitedNickerson v Barraclough (1) ChD 1980
The court considered an assertion that a right of necessity was implied into a deed.
Held: ‘In the present case the land conveyed was plainly intended to be used for building purposes, and of course it plainly needed access for building . .
CitedBarry v Hasseldine 1952
The grantee’s land was surrounded partly by land of the vendor, and partly by that of other parties, including a disused airfield owned by a third party. For some time following the grant they had been able to obtain access over the airfield by . .
CitedSt Edmondsbury and Ipswich Diocesan Board of Finance v Clark (No 2) ChD 1975
A reservation contained In a conveyance must be construed in the context of the deed as a whole, and in the light of the surrounding circumstances.
Held: Sir John Pennycuick said: ‘Mr Vinelott contended that the proper method of construction . .
CitedE R Ives Investments Ltd v High CA 14-Dec-1966
One exception to the requirement that an easement must be granted by a deed is that if permission to enjoy a right, capable of constituting an easement, is given by the landowner in terms likely to lead, and that do lead, the beneficiary of the . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromSommer and Another v Sweet and Another CA 10-Mar-2005
The claimants had sought entry into theirs and their neighbour’s registered land titles of entries to acknowledge their rights of way. The neighbours appealed the finding of a right of way of necessity and by proprietary estoppel, and an order for . .
CitedAdealon International Proprietary Ltd v London Borough of Merton ChD 12-Apr-2006
The claimant had bought land originally bought from the defendant, but after a long series of events, the only available access was over the retained land. It sought a right of way of necessity.
Held: At the time of the grant, other access was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 March 2021; Ref: scu.200643