First National Bank Plc v Thompson: CA 25 Jul 1995

A charge executed before a purchase was ‘fed’ by a subsequent purchase and had priority. ‘Feeding the estoppel’ doctrine may apply to charges on registered land. The estoppel was fed by a later purchase without a clear recital of the title in the charge.

Citations:

Ind Summary 31-Jul-1995, Times 25-Jul-1995, Gazette 15-Sep-1995

Statutes:

Land Registration Act 1925

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Equity, Registered Land, Land

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.80559

British Coal Corporation v Gwent County Council: CA 6 Jul 1995

Compensation for subsidence damage measured by cost of repair and re-instatement. Lands Tribunal has no general power to award interest on compensation.

Citations:

Times 18-Jul-1995, Independent 06-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 3(1), Coal Industries Act 1975 2(4)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.78618

Denty and Another v Hussein: ChD 26 May 1999

The parties owned adjoining premises. The plaintiffs sought relief, alledging that their rights of way had been infringed. The defendant had erected fences and gates across a service road.
Held: Where a party erected a fence obstructing a right of way, the court was able to differentiate between rights of way by foot and vehicular rights of way. The right of way by car had begun only within the prior 20 years. That particular right of way could be enforced by injunction, but not for the extent of use claimed.

Judges:

D L Mackie QC

Citations:

Gazette 16-Jun-1999, [1999] 96 (24) LSG 40

Statutes:

Prescription Act 1832

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Limitation

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.79903

Longbottom and Longbottom v Bingley Urban District Council: LT 1974

When calculating compensation on the compulsory purchase of property occupied by a partnership, an allowance should be made for managerial or supervisory wages by adding back the wages or drawings of both partners to the average net profits for three years. This was because the council were required to take the premises and the business as they found them and the business was a partnership of the two claimants and it was irrelevant that it might have been bought by a limited company if sold as a going concern.

Citations:

[1974] 14 RVR 139

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHalil v London Borough of Lambeth LT 2-Mar-2001
LT COMPENSATION – compulsory acquisition of leasehold shop and premises – total extinguishment of business – disturbance – analysis of accounts – treatment of wife’s earnings – depreciation of capital assets – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.230996

Margate Town Centre Regeneration Company Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another: Admn 2 May 2013

Challenges to compulsory purchase orders.
Held: The Orders stand

Judges:

Sycamore HHJ

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 973 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Acquisition of Land Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromMargate Town Centre Regeneration Company Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others CA 8-Oct-2013
Appeal against dismissal of claim for quashing of compulsory purchase order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Planning

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.491916

Robinson Webster (Holdings) Ltd v Agombar: ChD 9 Apr 2001

Declaration as to public rights of way. The court considered the sufficiency of historical evidence to show dedication of public vehicular rights.

Judges:

Etherton J

Citations:

[2002] 1 P and CR 20, [2001] EWHC 510 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFortune and Others v Wiltshire Council and Another CA 20-Mar-2012
The court considered the contnuation of public rights of way against the new system of the ending of certain unrecorded rights.
Held: he appeal failed. ‘As a matter of plain language, section 67(2)(b) does not, in our judgment, require the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.201640

Robinson v Adair: QBD 2 Mar 1995

The Truro Crown Court had allowed Mr Adair’s appeal against his conviction for obstructing a highway. The prosecutor appealed.
Held: It had to be decided whether a particular road had become by presumed dedication a public highway. The use relied on constituted an offence under section 34(1) of the 1988 Act. A claim of long user which was based upon acts prohibited by statute cannot found a claim for a public right of way. The court could see no rational distinction between acquisition of a private easement by presumed grant after long illegal user and the presumed dedication of a highway after long illegal user.

Judges:

Dyson J

Citations:

Times 02-Mar-1995, [1995] NPC 30

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 137, Road Traffic Act 1988 34(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHanning and Others v Top Deck Travel Group Ltd CA 9-Jun-1993
The owner of a common appealed a finding that the neighbouring land owner had acquired by prescription a right of way across the common to use a track for commercial vehicles (buses) to get to the property (the bus depot).
Held: An easement . .

Cited by:

CitedBakewell Management Limited v Brandwood and others HL 1-Apr-2004
Houses were built next to a common. Over many years the owners had driven over the common. The landowners appealed a decision that they could not acquire a right of way by prescription over the common because such use had been unlawful as a criminal . .
CitedHereford and Worcester County Council v Pick 1-Apr-1995
The issue was whether a presumed dedication of a road as a public highway could result from twenty years or more of uninterrupted public use in breach of section 34(1) of the 1988 Act. The court was considering whether a footpath, alleged to have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.88823

McGeown v Northern Ireland Housing Executive: HL 24 Jun 1994

The plaintiff lived with her husband in a house in a housing estate of which he was a tenant. Part of the land of the estate, in the ownership of the defendant housing authority, was crossed by footpaths, over which the public had acquired the right of way. The plaintiff was walking on one of the paths when she tripped in a hole in it and broke her leg. The hole was a danger to persons using the path and resulted from a failure to keep the path in good repair.
Held: A landowner was not liable to the public using a right of way for negligent non-feasance. No positive duty of care exists toward users of public right of way over private land.
The person using the public right of way did so by right and could not be said to be an invitee of the landowners.
Although the plaintiff would have been a licensee of the housing authority in respect of the path on which she had fallen, before it had become a public right of way, that license had merged in the right of way subsequently established; and accordingly it made no difference that the path had formed part of a means of access for the plaintiff to and from the house of which her husband was tenant
Lord Keith of Kinkel referred to a number of authorities before saying: ‘the rule in Gautret v Egerton is deeply entrenched in the law. Further, the rule is in my opinion undoubtedly a sound and reasonable one. Rights of way pass over many different types of terrain and it would place an impossible burden upon landowners if they not only had to submit to the passage over them of anyone who might choose to exercise the right, but also were under a duty to maintain them in a safe condition. Persons using rights of way do so not with the permission of the owner of the solum but in the exercise of a right. There is no room for the view that such persons might have been licensees or invitees of the land owner under the old law or that they are his visitors under the English and Northern Irish Acts of 1957.’
Lord Keith added: ‘If the pathway on which the Plaintiff fell in the present case had not become subject to a public right of way it seems clear that the Defendants would have owed her a common duty of care under the Act of 1957 and would have been liable accordingly.’

Judges:

Lord Keith of Kinkel

Citations:

Gazette 03-Aug-1994, Independent 28-Jun-1994, Times 24-Jun-1994, [1994] 3 All ER 53, [1994] 3 WLR 187, [1995] 1 AC 233

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, Occupiers’ Liability Act (Northern Ireland) 1957 2

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

CitedGautret v Egerton 1867
A man fell to his death when crossing a bridge used with the consent and permission of the defendants by persons proceeding to and coming from the defendants’ docks.
Held: The claim by his widow against the bridge owner was dismissed.

Cited by:

CitedBarlow v Wigan Council QBD 19-Jun-2019
Responsibility for personal injury after trip over a tree root on a path in a park owned and maintained by the Council. The Court was now asked whether the public footpath was a highway under the 1980 Act for which the council was responsible for . .
CitedBarlow v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1-Jun-2020
Presumption of dedication dates back.
The claimant tripped over a tree root raising a path in the park. The court was now asked whether the pathway through a public park, but which was not a public right of way, was maintainable at public expense as a highway governed by the 1980 Act. . .
CitedGulliksen v Pembrokeshire County Council QBD 2002
Mr Gulliksen was walking on a footpath on a housing estate to the house of a friend. He had an accident at a depressed manhole cover on the footpath over which he tripped. The footpath had been constructed by Pembrokeshire County Council, who were . .
CitedGulliksen v Pembrokeshire County Council CA 11-Jul-2002
The claimant had tripped on a footpath on a housing estate. There was a depressed manhole cover on the footpath over which he tripped. The footpath had been constructed by Pembrokeshire County Council, who were both the local housing authority and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Land

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.83539

Re Land at Freshfields: ChD 27 Jan 1993

Where land had been registered by the Commons Commissioner as common land by virtue of a mistake, the Act provided no mechanism for the correction of that mistake. In this case it was not established that the land comprised fields which were not as such derelict, and had been part of a garden. The registration of it as common land stood.

Citations:

Ind Summary 22-Feb-1993, Times 01-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Common Land (Rectification of Registers) Act 1989 1, Commons Registration Act 1965

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCresstock Investments Ltd v The Commons Commissioner CA 10-Jul-1992
The Commons Commissioner had included a wood within the commons. The landowner appealed.
Held: A 1933 conveyance as had referred to the land as ‘several pieces or parcels of land adjoining and enjoyed with’ the house, and it had been enjoyed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.85810

Gordon and Others (Trustees of The Inter Vivos Trust) v Campbell Riddell Breeze Paterson Llp: SC 15 Nov 2017

The claimants appealed from rejection of their claims for losses saying that such losses had been caused by their solicitors in failing properly to identify the tenant and the relevant lease when issuing notices to quit. The solicitors argued that the losses occurred when the defective notices were served, and by that date, the claims were debarred as out of time.
Held: The appeal failed. Section 11(3) does not postpone the start of the prescriptive period until a creditor of an obligation is aware actually or constructively that he or she has suffered a detriment in the sense that something has gone awry rendering the creditor poorer or otherwise at a disadvantage. The creditor does not have to know that he or she has a head of loss. It is sufficient that a creditor is aware that he or she has not obtained something which the creditor had sought or that he or she has incurred expenditure.
The Court accepted that the result may be harsh for some suffering loss, but also acknowledged that reform was being discussed.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 75, UKSC 2016/0142

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Videos Summary, SC 2017 Jul 19am Video

Statutes:

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal fromGordon and Others v Campbell Riddell Breeze Paterson Llp SCS 8-Mar-2016
(Extra Division, Inner House) The claimant trustees appealed from rejection of their claims of professional negligence against the defendant solicitors as out of time. The parties disputed whether the limitation period ran from the service of . .
CitedDavid T Morrison and Co Ltd (T/A Gael Home Interiors) v ICL Plastics Ltd and Others SC 30-Jul-2014
The claimant sought damages after an explosion at the defender’s nearby premises damaged its shop. The defender said that the claim was out of time, and now appealed against a decision that time had not begun to run under the 1973 Act.
Held: . .
At Outer HouseThe Inter-Vivos Trust of The Late William Strathdee Gordon v Campbell Riddle Breeze Paterson Llp SCS 25-Mar-2015
(Outer House) The trustees said they had suffered losses from the negligence of the defendant solicitors in serving incorrect notices to quit under leases. The solicitors said that the claim was time barred.
Held: After hearing evidence in a . .
CitedDunlop v McGowans HL 6-Mar-1980
The landlord of a block of flats needed vacant possession to pursue redevelopment. The respondent solicitors failed to give the necessary notice in good time, delaying the development by a year. The landlord appellant delayed five years before . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation, Professional Negligence

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.599381

Simpsons Motor Sales (London) Ltd v Hendon Corporation: HL 1964

The plaintiff complained of an attempt by the defendant local authority to enforce in October 1958 a CPO made several years earlier. He obtained at first instance an injunction to restrain the local authority from proceedings on the basis of an increase in land values between times. The Court of Appeal reversed the first instance decision.
Held: The appeal failed. Delay by the acquiring authority in acquiring the land is not a sufficient ground to disentitle it from proceeding to acquisition if it was based on good conscience unless those seeking the relief can establish bad faith or or that the owners or those seeking the relief have been placed in an unfair position because of the long period which has elapsed since the service of the notice to treat. However, where a body has a power of compulsory acquisition which is expressed or limited by reference to a particular purpose, then it is not legitimate for the body to seek to use the power for a different or collateral purpose.
Lord Evershed accepted that there might be circumstances where a court could interfere, such as where to permit the local authority to enforce its rights under the CPO would: ‘be against good conscience. In order to achieve such a result it seems to me that it would be necessary to show one or both of the following: that there had been on the part of the Corporation, something in the nature of bad faith, some misconduct, some abuse of their powers: that there had been on the part of Simpsons some alteration of their position – something must have been done or not have been done by them on the faith and in the belief that there would be a speedy acquisition of the North road site: in other words, that they had in some sense been put into an unfair position because of the long period which had elapsed since the service of the notice to treat’.

Judges:

Lord Evershed

Citations:

[1964] AC 1088

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSimpsons Motor Sales (London) Ltd v Hendon Corporation (No 1) CA 1962
The use of land purchased under compulsory powers for a different purpose was ultra vires, but did not undermine the original notice to treat. There was no reason not to use a compendious description of the range of purposes for which land was to be . .

Cited by:

CitedSainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another SC 12-May-2010
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an . .
At HLSimpsons Motor Sales (London) Ltd v Hendon Corporation 1965
The paying party under an order for costs objected to the amount of leadig counsel’s fees.
Held: Pennycuick J discussed Rule 28(2) and the Smith -v- Bullins Case: ‘The words ‘or proper for the attainment of justice or for enforcing or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Administrative

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.414938

Thamesmead Town Ltd v Allotey: CA 21 Jan 1998

A successor in title to the original covenantor would not pay his share of the costs of repairing and maintaining sewers he used as appurtenant to his house. The covenantee in which the relevant housing estate was vested sued for their recovery. The defence was that as the defendant had not been a party to the original covenant he could not be liable for the sums claimed. That defence succeeded at first instance.
Held: The appeal failed. The rule against enforcing the burden of positive covenant against the covenantor’s successor in title was upheld but criticised. Peter Gibson LJ noted that there was an exception to the rule that the burden of a positive covenant does not run with the land in cases where the covenantor may not take the benefit of a transaction without undertaking the burden imposed by it, and stressed the need for a correlation between the burden and the benefit the successor in title has chosen to take and his ability to choose whether or not to take the benefit.

Judges:

Peter Gibson LJ, Hobhouse and Butler-Sloss LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 21-Jan-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 15, (1998) 30 HLR 1052

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDavies and Others v Jones and Another CA 9-Nov-2009
The parties contracted for the sale of land for development. The contract allowed for the costs of environmental remediation, but disputed the true figure set by the eventual builder and retained. The court now heard argument about whether the sum . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.89788

Regina v Oxfordshire County Council ex parte Sunningwell Parish Council: CA 24 Nov 1997

The Parish Council appealed against refusal of leave to seek judicial review of a decision to reject an application for certain land to be registered as a common.

Judges:

Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2807, [2006] Ch 43

Statutes:

Commons Registration Act 1965 13(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Oxfordshire County Council ex parte Sunningwell Parish Council Admn 11-Jul-1996
The Parish Council sought judicial review of the county council’s decision to reject a regristation of land as a Common on the ground that the user of the land by the villagers had not been shown to be ‘as of right.’
Held: Leave to bring the . .
AppliedRegina v Suffolk County Council Ex Parte Steed and Another CA 2-Aug-1996
Customary rights over land were not defeated by failure to register as common. ‘As of right’ meant that the right must be exercised in the belief that it is a right enjoyed by the inhabitants of the village to the exclusion of all other people. ‘it . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Oxfordshire County Council and Another, Ex Parte Sunningwell Parish Council HL 25-Jun-1999
When setting out to establish that a piece of land has become a village green with rights of common, the tests are similar to those used in the law of prescription and adverse possession. Accordingly, there is no need to establish a belief in those . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 11 November 2022; Ref: scu.143206

Regina v Secretary of State for Wales Ex Parte Emery: CA 9 Jul 1997

The applicant had sought to have included in the definitive map, a local footpath, and now challenged refusal to include it.
Held: A public right of way may be created by dedication or it may be deemed after actual use by the public over twenty years; need to modify definitive map. In this case, it had not been a reasonable conclusion for the Secretary of State to reach that the evidence submitted in support of the application made under section 53 (5) was not such as to indicate that a right of way was reasonably alleged to subsist.

Judges:

Nourse, Roch, Phillips LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 23-Jul-1997, Times 22-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2064, [1998] 4 All ER 367, [1997] EG 114

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 31, Highways Act 1981 53, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Sch 14, National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for Wales Ex Parte Emery QBD 24-Jun-1996
A public enquiry is necessary where there is a real dispute over the existence of a public right of way. . .
CitedLloyd v McMahon HL 12-Mar-1987
The district auditor had issued a certificate under the 1982 Act surcharging the appellant councillors in the sum of 106,103, pounds being the amount of a loss incurred or deficiency caused, as the auditor found, by their wilful misconduct.
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Fire Brigades Union HL 5-Apr-1995
Parliament had passed the 1988 Act which provided for a new Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. Instead of implementing the Act, the Home Secretary drew up a non-statutory scheme for a tarriff based system by using prerogative powers. The . .
CitedJacques v Secretary of State for the Environment CA 1995
The Inspector had found that the landowner had, by overt acts directed at users of the way in question, including the erection of locked gates and of fencing and of notices, disproved any intention on his part to dedicate.
Held: The . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Bagshaw, Regina v Sane Ex Parte Norton and Bagshaw QBD 6-May-1994
Mr Bagshaw sought an order modifying the definitive map and statement to show a former mine track as a public right of way.
Held: A claimant seeking to establish a public path had to show evidence in support or that it was reasonable to make . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.87975

McCarthy and Another v Borough of Pendle: LT 18 Oct 2007

LT COMPENSATION – compulsory purchase – retail premises – acquired for comprehensive redevelopment – comparables – relevance of rent payable prior to claimants’ purchase of freehold – relevance of prices paid for properties purchased under shadow of CPO – surveyor’s.

Citations:

[2007] EWLands ACQ – 76 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.260326

Sharpness New Docks and Gloucester and Birmingham Navigation Co v Attorney General (At The Relation of The Worcester Corporation): HL 19 Feb 1915

Where the extent of an obligation is defined by statute the common law cannot be invoked to widen it.
Where a canal company were bound by statute to construct to the satisfaction of certain commissioners bridges which ‘shall from time to time be supported, maintained, and kept in sufficient repair,’ the company cannot be compelled to reconstruct the bridges to carry traffic heavier than was in contemplation by the commissioners when the bridges were built.
Decision of Court of Appeal, reported 1914, 3 K.B. 1, reversed.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Viscount Haldane), Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, Parker, and Parmoor

Citations:

[1915] UKHL 918, 52 SLR 918

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.620675

Lomax and others v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and another: Admn 10 May 2002

The authority sought compulsory purchase of land which adjoined a motorway. An agreement was made before the enquiry, but the inspector felt that others who were not represented would also be affected, and recommended rejection of the agreement. The Secretary of State proceeded, after substantial correspondence including with the objectors. The objectors complained that though affected they had not been given opportunity to object as required by the rules.
Held: For a breach of the rule to have taken place there had to be new material taken into account by the secretary which was causative of the decision, and that, if he had abided by rule 17(4), might have led to a different decision. In this case though the rule had been breached, the applicants could not show that they had been prejudiced in this way.

Citations:

Gazette 23-May-2002

Statutes:

Acquisition of Land Act 1981 23(2), Compulsory Purchase Rules 1990 17(4), Town and Country Planning Act 1990 266

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Planning

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.171267

Louis v Sadiq: CA 22 Nov 1996

The defendant neighbour had carried out construction works on a joint structure involving its demolition. He had not complied with the requirements of the 1917 Act.
Held: A neighbour doing work on a party wall without complying with the requirements of the Act was creating a nuisance, and he made himself liable for special damages, including some financial losses. A later award under the Act does not relieve a building owner from liability in nuisance or interference with rights of support for works undertaken before the date of the award, and he could not rely upon a defence in the Act, having later complied with it, to excuse his earlier wrong.

Judges:

Evans LJ

Citations:

Gazette 13-Dec-1996, Times 22-Nov-1996, [1997] 1 EGLR 136

Statutes:

London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRodrigues v Sokal TCC 30-Jul-2008
The parties owned either half of a semi-detached residence. The defendant had undertaken substantial redevelopment works, and the claimant sought damages under the 1996 Act for his failures to follow that Act. The issues had been taken to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages, Construction

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.83220

Berryman v Hounslow London Borough Council: CA 20 Nov 1996

No damages were to be awarded for a tenant’s injury suffered whilst climbing the stairs when the lift had not been repaired.

Citations:

Times 18-Dec-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 1001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Land, Housing, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.78369

Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd v Hastings Borough Council: ChD 23 Jun 1993

The local authority made a CPO in 1981 in respect of a sports ground. The applicants later acquired the land. In 1989 the order was confirmed and in March 1989 a vesting order was made. The authority was unable to afford to complete the purchase. In October 1992, the applicant sought a declaration that the order was no longer exercisable.
Held: A compulsory purchase order cannot be kept alive beyond the three year limit after its publication. The service of the particulars under 3(3) of the 1981 Act did not exercise the powers given by the order; that could only be done by a notice to treat. Accordingly the notice had lapsed. The failure by parliament when passing legislation in a related field to overrule a decision did not have the effect of confirming that decision.

Judges:

Vinelott J

Citations:

Times 23-Jun-1993, 91 LGR 608

Statutes:

Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 4, Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 4 5, Acquisition of Land Act 1981 3(1) 26(1), Planning and Compensation Act 1991 67

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not followedWestminster City Council v Quereshi 1961
. .
CitedHagee (London) Ltd v A B Erikson and Larson (a Firm) CA 1975
Tenancy at Will not protectable by 1954 Act
A tenancy at will falls outside the protection of the 1954 Act, though ‘parties cannot impose upon an agreement, by a choice of label, a nature or character which on its proper construction it does not possess’. Entry into possession while . .
CitedOtter v Norman HL 1988
The Rent Act 1977 had provided that a tenancy was not to be taken to be a protected tenancy of a dwelling house: ‘bona fide let at a rent which includes payments in respect of board or attendance’
Held: Where a landlord provided a continental . .
CitedPhillips v Mobil Oil 1989
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Local Government

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.79487

Regina v Suffolk County Council Ex Parte Steed and Another: CA 2 Aug 1996

Customary rights over land were not defeated by failure to register as common. ‘As of right’ meant that the right must be exercised in the belief that it is a right enjoyed by the inhabitants of the village to the exclusion of all other people. ‘it is no trivial matter for a landowner to have land, whether in public or private ownership, registered as a town green . .’ The meaning of the expression that land ‘becomes’ a Green is that the land ‘becomes registrable’ as a Green.

Judges:

Pill J

Citations:

Times 02-Aug-1996, (1996) 75 P and CR 102

Statutes:

Commons Registration Act 1965 1(2)(a) 22, Commons Registration (Time Limits) Order 1996 (SI 1966/1470)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Suffolk County Council Ex Parte Steed and Steed Admn 1995
Judicial review was sought of the Council’s decision to refuse to register a park as a Town or Village Green.
Held: Carnwath J looked at the procedure to be followed by a council receiving an application for registration of commons right: ‘it . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v City of Sunderland ex parte Beresford HL 13-Nov-2003
Land had been used as a park for many years. The council land owner refused to register it as a common, saying that by maintaining the park it had indicated that the use was by consent and licence, and that prescription did not apply.
Held: . .
ExplainedOxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council, Catherine Mary Robinson ChD 22-Jan-2004
Land had been registered in part as a common. The council appealed.
Held: The rights pre-existing the Act had not been lost. The presumption against retrospectively disapplying vested rights applied, and the application had properly been made. . .
CitedOxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and Another CA 24-Feb-2004
Application was made to register the ‘trap grounds’ as a village green.
Held: Carnwath LJ: ‘The 1965 Act created no new legal status, and no new rights or liabilities other than those resulting from the proper interpretation of section 10. . .
CitedOxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others HL 24-May-2006
Application had been made to register as a town or village green an area of land which was largely a boggy marsh. The local authority resisted the application wanting to use the land instead for housing. It then rejected advice it received from a . .
CitedLewis, Regina (on The Application of) v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council and Another SC 3-Mar-2010
The claimants sought to have land belonging to the council registered as a village green to prevent it being developed. They said that it had for more than twenty years been used by the community for various sports. The council replied that it had . .
AppliedRegina v Oxfordshire County Council ex parte Sunningwell Parish Council Admn 11-Jul-1996
The Parish Council sought judicial review of the county council’s decision to reject a regristation of land as a Common on the ground that the user of the land by the villagers had not been shown to be ‘as of right.’
Held: Leave to bring the . .
AppliedRegina v Oxfordshire County Council ex parte Sunningwell Parish Council CA 24-Nov-1997
The Parish Council appealed against refusal of leave to seek judicial review of a decision to reject an application for certain land to be registered as a common. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.88684

Porter and Another v Secretary of State for Transport: CA 3 Jun 1996

No issue estoppel on land value arose from a previous Secretary’s finding on Lands Tribunal.

Citations:

Times 03-Jun-1996, [1996] 3 All ER 693

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1961 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedForrester v The Secretary Of State For The Environment And South Buckinghamshire District Council Admn 14-Mar-1997
The applicant appealed dismissal of his appeal against a planning enforcement notice issued by the respondent. He said the change had taken place more than ten years before the notice and so was immune to enforcement proceedings. An earlier decision . .
CitedStar Energy Weald Basin Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa SC 28-Jul-2010
The defendant had obtained a licence to extract oil from its land. In order to do so it had to drill out and deep under the Bocardo’s land. No damage at all was caused to B’s land at or near the surface. B claimed in trespass for damages. It now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.84803

Wheeler and Another v JJ Saunders Ltd and Others: CA 19 Dec 1994

The existence of a planning permission did not excuse the causing of a nuisance by the erection of a pighouse. The permission was not a statutory authority, and particularly so where it was possible it had been procured by the supply of inaccurate and incomplete information.
The court considered the function of a gate: ‘The function of a gate is different from that of a fence. A gate is intended to prevent ingress and egress only when it is shut. It is of the essence of a gate that it can be opened whereas a fence cannot be opened and . . the covenant to fence does not refer to a gate.’ (Peter Gibson LJ)
Staughton LJ considered the significance of planing permissions as to nuisance: ‘One can readily appreciate that planning permission will, quite frequently, have unpleasant consequences for some people. The man with a view over open fields from his window may well be displeased if a housing estate is authorised by the planners and built in front of his house; the character of the neighbourhood is changed. But there may be nothing which would qualify as a nuisance and no infringement of his civil rights. What if the development does inevitably create what would otherwise be a nuisance? Instead of a housing estate the planners may authorise a factory which would emit noise and smoke to the detriment of neighbouring residents. Does that come within the first proposition of Cumming-Bruce LJ, that a planning authority has no jurisdiction to authorise a nuisance? Or is it within the second, that the authority may change the character of a neighbourhood?’ and
‘It would in my opinion be a misuse of language to describe what has happened in the present case as a change in the character of a neighbourhood. It is a change of use of a very small piece of land, a little over 350 square metres according to the dimensions on the plan, for the benefit of the applicant and to the detriment of the objectors in the quiet enjoyment of their house. It is not a strategic planning decision affected by considerations of public interest. Unless one is prepared to accept that any planning decision authorises any nuisance which must inevitably come from it, the argument that the nuisance was authorised by planning permission in this case must fail. I am not prepared to accept that premise. It may be – I express no concluded opinion – that some planning decisions will authorise some nuisances. But that is as far as I am prepared to go.’

Judges:

Staughton LJ, Peter Gibson LJ

Citations:

Times 03-Jan-1995, [1996] Ch 19, [1994] EWCA Civ 8, [1994] EWCA Civ 32, [1995] 3 WLR 466, [1995] 2 All ER 697

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWestminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .
CitedGillingham Borough Council v Medway (Chatham) Dock Co Ltd CA 1992
Neighbours complained at the development of a new commercial port on the site of a disused naval dockyard. Heavy vehicle traffic at night had a seriously deleterious effect on the comfort of local residents.
Held: Although a planning consent . .
CitedAllen v Gulf Oil Refining Ltd CA 1980
The exercise of the permission to develop granted by the local planning authority may have the result that the character of the neighbourhood changes and that which would previously have been a nuisance must be held no longer to be so

Cited by:

CitedHunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd HL 25-Apr-1997
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit . .
CitedAdam v Shrewsbury, Shrewsbury CA 28-Jul-2005
The neighbour parties disputed the existence of a right of way over one plot. The grant was for the use of a garage yet to be constructed, on ground to be excavated by the grantor, accessible only from a roadway which was only partly constructed, at . .
CitedWatson and others v Croft Promo-Sport Ltd CA 26-Jan-2009
The claimants were neighbours of the Croft motor racing circuit. They alleged nuisance in the levels of noise emanating from the site. The defendants denied nuisance saying that the interference was deemed reasonable since they operated within the . .
CitedLawrence and Another v Fen Tigers Ltd and Others QBD 4-Mar-2011
The claimants had complained that motor-cycle and other racing activities on neighbouring lands were a noise nuisance, but the court also considered that agents of the defendants had sought to intimidate the claimants into not pursuing their action. . .
CitedCoventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 26-Feb-2014
C operated a motor racing circuit as tenant. The neighbour L objected that the noise emitted by the operations were a nuisance. C replied that the fact of his having planning consent meant that it was not a nuisance.
Held: The neighbour’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Planning, Land, Nuisance

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.90439

Duke of Westminster and Others v Birrane: CA 17 Nov 1994

A basement extending under the house next door means that the property with the basement is not a not a dwelling-house for leasehold enfranchisement purposes. The result would create difficulties with flying freeholds. ‘The primary purpose of section 2(2) must have been to exclude from the operation of the Act houses in respect of which the inability of one freehold owner to enforce positive obligations against successors in title of the other would be likely to prejudice the enjoyment of the house or another part of the structure.’ and the test of materiality under section 2 was to be assessed on the basis that ‘if the part of the house which lies above or below a part of the structure not comprised in it is of sufficient substance or significance to make it likely that enfranchisement will prejudice the enjoyment of the house or another part of the structure, whether by reason of the inability of one freehold owner to enforce positive obligations against successors in title of the other or otherwise, then it is a material part of the house within section 2(2).’

Judges:

Nourse LJ

Citations:

Gazette 18-Jan-1995, Times 17-Nov-1994, Ind Summary 19-Dec-1994, [1995] QB 262

Statutes:

Leasehold Reform Act 1967 1(1) 2(1) 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

OverruledMalekshad v Howard de Walden Estates Limited HL 5-Dec-2002
A house and an adjoining building had been first demised under one lease, then separated vertically. Two separate residential properties now existed.
Held: The vertical division meant that the two houses could not be enfranchised as one under . .
CitedMalekshad v Howard De Walden Estates Limited CA 23-May-2001
The applicant sought the leasehold enfranchisement of two leasehold properties. They were contained in separate leases, but the property had been treated as one for some time. A part of one property extended under part of the other. The claim was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Land

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.80163

Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society Plc v Norgan: CA 5 Dec 1995

The starting point for assessing the period of time over which a court should order the repayment of arrears under a mortgage, when considering the need for a possession order, is the remaining balance of mortgage term.

Judges:

Evans, Waite LJJ, Sir John May

Citations:

Gazette 17-Jan-1996, Independent 14-Dec-1995, Times 08-Dec-1995, [1995] EWCA Civ 11, [1996] 1 WLR 343, [1996] 1 All ER 449, (1996) 28 HLR 443

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1970 30, Administration of Justice Act 1973 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer, Housing, Land

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.79006

Sussex Investments Ltd and Another v Jackson and Cornell: CA 29 Jul 1993

Where the owner was registered as proprietor of the land between the towpath and the water’s edge, the securing of boats at the water’s edge and the laying out of gangplanks, is a trespass to the land despite the existence of a right of towage.

Citations:

Times 29-Jul-1993, Gazette 02-Aug-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.89618

Mid-Glamorgan County Council v Ogwr Borough Council and Others: CA 5 Nov 1993

There was no need to serve a notice to treat on each commoner for a compulsory purchase order to proceed.

Citations:

Ind Summary 22-Nov-1993, Times 05-Nov-1993

Statutes:

Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 5 Sch 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromMid-Glamorgan County Council v Ogwr Borough Council and Others HL 3-Feb-1995
Land remained common land despite the individual rights having been compulsorily purchased by the local Authority. Once abandoned, it remained registerable. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83704

London and Blenheim Estates v Ladbroke Retail Parks Ltd: CA 1 Jun 1993

The land-owner sold part of his land, granting easements over the retained land, and an agreement that, if further plots were purchased, similar easements would be granted. The agreement stated that the purchaser should have the right to give notice to nominate which land would constitute the dominant land for the purposes of any new easement. The purchaser bought additional land, but the original landowner had already sold on the remainder of his own land. The buyer sought a declaration that all the land had the benefit of the easement.
Held: An easement of parking is recognised in English Law. However, the original clause had not created an interest in land. Land could not be allowed to become burdened to an uncertain extent. Successors in title to the servient tenement could not be bound by such an interest until it became certain, by identification of the dominant land. The clause required a notice to be given, and the right to claim an easement arose only when that notice was given and they were not bound on the purchase itself.
The identification of a purchaser is not crucial to the existence of an estate contract in the sense that a contract in favour of an as yet unidentified purchaser to be nominated by a contracting party is a valid estate contract.
Peter Gibson LJ said: ‘an essential part of the interest to be granted was left uncertain. If one asks why the law should require that there should be a dominant tenement before there can be a grant, or a contract for a grant, of an easement sufficient to create an interest binding successors in title to the servient land, the answer would appear to lie in the policy against encumbering land with burdens of uncertain extent.
A further related answer lies in the reluctance of the law to recognise new forms of burden on property conferring more than contractual rights. A right intended as an easement and attached to a servient tenement before the dominant tenement is identified would in my view be an incident of a novel kind.’

Judges:

Peter Gibson LJ

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-1993, [1993] 4 All ER 157, [1994] 1 WLR 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPritchard v Briggs CA 1980
A conveyance of part in 1944 gave a right of pre-emption over retained land. The vendor’s successors the let the retained land to the plaintiff with an option to buy the freehold reversion. The retained land was sold to the defendants in purported . .
DistinguishedTurley v Mackay 1943
. .
Appeal fromLondon and Blenheim Estates Ltd v Ladbroke Retail Parks Ltd ChD 29-Jul-1992
A right to park was claimed as an easement.
Held: The question whether the right to park that had been claimed was consistent with the nature of an easement was one of degree: ‘A small coal shed in a large property is one thing. The exclusive . .

Cited by:

CitedSainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Olympia Homes Limited, Hughes etc ChD 17-Jun-2005
The claimant sought rectification of the land register. In a development deal, an option agreement had not been registered, and the land sold on. The land was required to allow the building of a roundabout necessary for the intended store. An . .
CitedBatchelor v Marlow and Another CA 12-Jul-2001
The applicant claimed parking rights as an easement acquired by prescription. At first instance the rights were recognised as an easement. The rights included parking during daylight hours during weekdays. The land-owner appealed on the ground that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83154

Greenwich London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Environment and Another: CA 2 Mar 1993

When the Secretary of State considered the offer of land in substitution for other land, an ancient woodland and site of special scientific interest, which was sought to be compulsorily acquired for a roadway, he was entitled to assess whether the exchanged land would be equally advantageous at the time when the exchange would take place, and to exercise a degree of flexibility.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Mar-1993, Times 02-Mar-1993, [1993] CLY 439

Statutes:

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Acquisition of Land Act 1981 19

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81017

Hanning and Others v Top Deck Travel Group Ltd: CA 9 Jun 1993

The owner of a common appealed a finding that the neighbouring land owner had acquired by prescription a right of way across the common to use a track for commercial vehicles (buses) to get to the property (the bus depot).
Held: An easement cannot become a right where the use of the route is illegal by virtue of a statutory provision. A use contrary to a statute cannot create an easement by prescription. The statute provided for a fine to be payable for someone using such a right of way other than by foot.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dillon Lord Justice Kennedy And Sir Roger Parker

Citations:

Gazette 09-Jun-1993, Times 06-May-1993, [1993] NPC 73 CA, [1993] CLY 1821, [1994] P and C R 14

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 193(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedGeorge Legge and Son Ltd v Wenlock Corporation HL 1938
The question was whether the status of a natural stream could be changed to that of a sewer by the unlawful discharge for a long period of sewage into the stream. The claimant asserted that a right by way of an easement could be acquired despite the . .
FollowedGlamorgan County Council v Carter QBD 1962
A caravan owner appealed against an enforcement notice on the basis that no planning permission was required because the parking of caravans was the purpose for which the land had been last used.
Held: Factually that was correct. Prima facie . .
CitedCargill v Gotts CA 1981
The Act prohibited abstraction of water from a river without a licence from the Water Authority. The defendant had no such licence, but asserted that having extracted water over many years from the mill pond, he had acquired the right to do so: ‘The . .
CitedNeaverson v Peterborough Rural District Council ChD 1902
The 1812 Act provided for the draining, enclosing and improving of a fen which was common land. Under the Act the grass growing on various roadways was vested in the surveyor of highways, who had power to let it for the pasturage of ‘sound and . .

Cited by:

DoubtedBakewell Management Ltd v Brandwood and Others ChD 21-Mar-2002
The claimant sought a declaration that he had acquired an easement over land by driving over it, over several years. The land owner denied the easement, saying that section 193 made the claimant’s activity a crime, and that, following Hanning, . .
AppliedRoland Brandwood and others v Bakewell Management Ltd CA 30-Jan-2003
House owners had used vehicular access across a common to get to their houses for many years. The commons owner required them to purchase the right, and they replied that they had acquired the right by lost modern grant and/or by prescription.
OverruledBakewell Management Limited v Brandwood and others HL 1-Apr-2004
Houses were built next to a common. Over many years the owners had driven over the common. The landowners appealed a decision that they could not acquire a right of way by prescription over the common because such use had been unlawful as a criminal . .
CitedRobinson v Adair QBD 2-Mar-1995
The Truro Crown Court had allowed Mr Adair’s appeal against his conviction for obstructing a highway. The prosecutor appealed.
Held: It had to be decided whether a particular road had become by presumed dedication a public highway. The use . .
CitedHereford and Worcester County Council v Pick 1-Apr-1995
The issue was whether a presumed dedication of a road as a public highway could result from twenty years or more of uninterrupted public use in breach of section 34(1) of the 1988 Act. The court was considering whether a footpath, alleged to have . .
AppliedMassey and Another v Boulden and Another CA 14-Nov-2002
The claimants said they had acquired a right of way by vehicle over land, a village green, having driven over it for more than forty years. It was responded that the act of driving over the land other than on a track had been an unlawful act, and as . .
Relied uponHayling v Harper and Another CA 2-Apr-2003
The case asked whether vehicular user of a public footpath in breach of section 34(1) of the 1988 Act could lead to the acquisition by prescription of a public right of way.
Held: Hanning barred a claim to the easement under section 2 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81220

Hughes v Cook and Another: CA 14 Feb 1994

Adverse possession will accrue even if the claimant believed and acted on the mistaken belief that the land was already his. That belief was inconsistent with ownership by others. Beldam LJ said that counsel’s argument was fallacious: ‘. . in the failure to distinguish between an intention to possess, which is required, and an intention to dispossess, which is not.’
Saville LJ said: ‘The learned judge appears to have held that it is impossible for someone who believes himself to be the true owner to acquire title by adverse possession since such a person cannot, ex hypothesi, have an intention to exclude or oust the true owner. If this were the law then only those who knew they were trespassing, that is to say doing something illegal, could require such a title, whilst those who did not realise that they were doing anything wrong would acquire no right at all. I can see no reason why, as a matter of justice or common sense, the former but not the latter should be able to acquire title in this way. What the law requires is factual possession i.e. an exclusive dealing with the land as an occupying owner might be expected to deal with it, together with a manifested intention to treat the land as belonging to the possessor to the exclusion of everyone else. Obviously if the possessor knows or believes someone else has the paper title to the land he must intend to exclude that person along with everyone else. But in the absence of such knowledge or belief it is in my judgment sufficient for this part of the second requirement simply to establish a manifest intention to exclude everyone.’

Judges:

Beldam LJ, Saville LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 21-Mar-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRoberts v Swangrove Estates Ltd and Another ChD 14-Mar-2007
The court heard preliminary applications in a case asserting acquisition of land by adverse possession, the land being parts of the foreshore of the Severn Estuary.
Held: A person may acquire title to part of the bed of a tidal river by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81520

City of Bradford Metropolitan Council v McMahon and McMahon: CA 21 Apr 1993

The right to buy a council house is dependant on the existence of a secure tenancy to which it is incidental, and that right disappears on the death of the tenant because there was no secure tenancy left upon which to base the right: ‘It is a creature of statute and is sui generis; if it is helpful to equate it to some more general right recognised by the courts I would prefer to describe it as analogous to a personal equity.’

Judges:

Balcombe LJ

Citations:

Independent 21-Apr-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 52, (1993) 25 HLR 534

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 121 ff

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedZionmor v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Islington CA 10-Oct-1997
The council appealed a finding that the claimant, a secure tenant, had not surrendered his tenancy. He had sought to exercise his right to buy the property, but was said to have left the premises before the lease was completed. The property was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Local Government, Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.79145

Burton v Winters: CA 2 Jun 1993

The defendant’s garage had encroached by one brick’s width on the plaintiff’s land and had been built in 1975. The plaintiff obtained a declaration that that was the position in 1990 but was refused the mandatory injunction which she sought. The plaintiff would not accept this conclusion and she trespassed on, and interfered with, the defendant’s garage and land. The defendants obtained an injunction to restrain her from doing so, but she continued, and she was the subject of an application for committal for contempt, and she was committed for contempt for a period of two years. She appealed.
Held: She had not been entitled to use self help. Self help was wrong in a complicated case, but abatement is available in simple cases where the abatement would remove the nuisance and the cost of legal proceedings could not be justified. Self help to overcome a trespass by encroachment could rarely be justified.
Lloyd LJ discussed the relevant principles of self help: ‘Ever since the assize of nuisance became available, the courts have confined the remedy by way of self-redress to simple cases such as an overhanging branch, or an encroaching root, which would not justify the expense of legal proceedings, and urgent cases which require an immediate remedy. Thus, it was Bracton’s view that where there is resort to self-redress, the remedy should be taken without delay. In Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book III, chapter 1, we find: ‘And the reason why the law allows this private and summary method of doing one’s self justice, is because injuries of this kind, which obstruct or annoy such things as are of daily convenience and use, require an immediate remedy; and cannot wait for the slow progress of the ordinary forms of justice.’
The modern textbooks, both here and in other common law jurisdictions, follow the same line: see Salmond and Heuston on Torts, 20th ed. (1992) p. 485; Clerk and Lindsell on Torts, 16th ed. (1989) p. 36; Fleming, The Law of Torts, 7th ed. (1987), p. 415 and Prosser and Keeton, The Law of Torts, 4th ed. (1971), p.641. In Prosser and Keeton we find: ‘Consequently the privilege [of abatement] must be exercised within a reasonable time after knowledge of the nuisance is acquired or should have been acquired by the person entitled to abate; if there has been sufficient delay to allow resort to legal process, the reason for the privilege fails, and the privilege with it.’
. . And: ‘In my opinion, this never was an appropriate case for self-redress, even if the plaintiff had acted promptly. There was no emergency. There were difficult questions of law and fact to be considered and the remedy by way of self-redress, if it resulted in the demolition of the garage wall, would have been out of all proportion to the damage suffered by the plaintiff.’ As to the refusal of the mandatory injunction he said: ‘Self redress is a summary remedy, which is justified only in clear and simple cases, or in an emergency.’

Judges:

Anthony Lloyd LJ

Citations:

Gazette 02-Jun-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1077, [1993] 3 All ER 847

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMoffett v Brewer 1848
Greene J said: ‘This summary method of redressing a grievance, by the act of an injured party, should be regarded with great jealousy, and authorised only in cases of particular emergency, requiring a more speedy remedy than can be had by the . .

Cited by:

AppliedChamberlain v Lindon Admn 18-Mar-1998
The appellant challenged the dismissal of his private prosecution of the defendant in destroying a new garden wall. The magistrates had found a lawful excuse in that the defendant said that the wall had been constructed to obstruct his private right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Torts – Other, Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.78775

Locabail (UK) Ltd and Another v Waldorf Investment Corporation and Others: ChD 31 Mar 1999

A consent to a mortgage on a property, allowed a bank to substitute a second charge for the first, without the owners consent, but this was limited to the extent and value of the first charge. There was no argument to limit the effect of the second charge to an equitable charge.

Citations:

Times 31-Mar-1999, Gazette 19-May-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedEquity and Law Home Loans Ltd v Prestidge CA 1992
A house was bought in the name of one partner in an unmarried couple. It was subject to a mortgage, and the non-owner contributed a capital sum. The landowner later remortgaged for a larger sum, but without the partner’s consent. The landowner then . .
See AlsoLocabail (UK) Ltd and Another v Waldorf Investment Corporation and Others (No 4) ChD 13-Jun-2000
An application to the European Court of Human Rights was not an appeal. Where it was clear that any decision there would not affect the issues between the parties, there was no reason to suspend enforcement of the order which had given rise to the . .

Cited by:

See AlsoLocabail (UK) Ltd and Another v Waldorf Investment Corporation and Others (No 4) ChD 13-Jun-2000
An application to the European Court of Human Rights was not an appeal. Where it was clear that any decision there would not affect the issues between the parties, there was no reason to suspend enforcement of the order which had given rise to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Land

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.83126

White v Lynch: QBD 7 Jul 2011

The claimant was landlord of the tenant’s restaurant property. He sought an injunction to require the defendant to comply with planning permissions requiring the premises to close at midnight.

Judges:

Edwards-Stuart J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1664 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Land

Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.441883

Lancashire County Council, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: CA 12 Apr 2018

The court was asked: ‘Did the concept of ‘statutory incompatibility’ defeat an application for the registration of land as a town or village green under section 15 of the Commons Act 2006? ‘ At first instance, the judge had held that he could not properly interfere with the inspector’s conclusion.
Held: The CA agreed with the court at first instance

Judges:

Rupert Jackson, Lindblom, ThirlwallLJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 721

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromLancashire County Council v The Secretary of State for The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another Admn 27-May-2016
Ouseley J he said that he would have arrived at a different conclusion from the Inspector as to the purpose for which the Authority had acquired the land at issue; but considered that that did not entitle him to interfere with the inspector’s . .

Cited by:

At CALancashire County Council, Regina (on The Application of) v SSEFRA and Another SC 11-Dec-2019
Two appeals as to the circumstances in which the concept of ‘statutory incompatibility’ will defeat an application to register land as a town or village green where the land is held by a public authority for statutory purposes. In the first case, . .
CitedAdamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council CA 18-Feb-2020
Appropriation was not in sufficient form
The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Local Government, Planning

Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.608721

Re Ocensa Pipeline Group Litigation: TCC 27 Jul 2016

This litigation is brought by 109 claimants in respect of 73 farms, each of whom claims that the Ocensa pipeline caused damage for which he or she should be compensated. It is brought in England because the Defendant was at the relevant time an English subsidiary of BP and was involved in the Ocensa project. The substantive claims are subject to the Colombian law of torts and contract. The State of Colombia formally recognises the public benefit attaching to oil pipeline projects and has established a regulatory legal framework that reflects the tension between public benefit and private detriment to which I have already referred. Whether and to what extent that framework creates, limits or excludes private law rights is only one of the elements of Colombian law affecting the outcome of this litigation.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1699 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 13 October 2022; Ref: scu.567837

Rangeley v Midland Railway Company: CA 1868

Where there is a highway, the surface of the land or other property is dedicated to public use.
Cairns LJ described a highway as: ‘a dedication to the public of the occupation of the surface of the land for the purpose of passing and repassing.’

Judges:

Cairns LJ

Citations:

[1868] 3 Ch App 306

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Land Registry (Peterborough Office) and Another CA 10-Mar-2010
The appellant had lived in a caravan on the verge of a byway and had been here for more than twelve years. He appealed against rejection of his request for possessory title. He said that there was no support in law for the maxim that adverse . .
CitedDillner, Regina (on The Application of) v Sheffield City Council Admn 27-Apr-2016
The claimant challenged the policy of the respondent council to replace many established trees along streets in the City.
Held: Permission to apply for review was refused: ‘Some concern has been expressed by objectors to the scheme that, in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.443845

Greene v Chelsea Borough Council: CA 1954

Lord Denning MR said: ‘Knowledge or notice of the danger is only a defence when the plaintiff is free to act upon that knowledge or notice so as to avoid the danger’.

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1954] 2 QBD 127

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRoles v Nathan CA 15-May-1963
Two chimney sweeps were overcome by fumes, and died in the basement of the Manchester Assembly Rooms. Whilst occupied working in flues (against advice), a boiler had been lit.
Held: (Majority – Pearson LJ dissenting) The land-owner’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Land, Negligence

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.568158

Taylor v Betterment Properties (Weymouth) Ltd and Another: CA 7 Mar 2012

The respondent owned farmland over which public rights of way were claimed.

Judges:

Carnwath, Sullivan, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2012] 2 PandCR 3, [2012] EWCA Civ 250

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commons Registration Act 1965 2, Commons Registration (New Land) Regulations 1969, ountryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 22(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBetterment Properties (Weymouth) Ltd v Dorset County Council ChD 2-Mar-2007
The company sought an order removing some 46 acres of land from designation as a village green. The claimant sought the amendment of the register. The parties disputed what evidence beyond that available to the committee making the decision should . .

Cited by:

CitedWinterburn and Another v Bennett and Another CA 25-May-2016
The court was asked as to the steps which an owner of land must take to prevent others, who were using the land without permission, acquiring rights over the land. The claimants here had ignored clear signs placed on the land which asserted the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451833

Palmer v Fletcher: KBD 1793

‘. . the lights are a necessary and essential part of the house’

Judges:

Twysden and Wyndham JJ

Citations:

[1793] EngR 798, (1793) 1 Lev 122, (1793) 83 ER 329 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPhilllips v Low ChD 3-Nov-1891
There had been a conveyance of land with a house on it whose window looked onto other land of the vendor.
Held: There was an implied ancillary right that the window would not be obscured by act of the vendor. There is applicable to devises of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.357385

Regina (on the Application of the Personal Representatives of Christopher Beeson) v Dorset County Council and Another: QBD 30 Nov 2001

The Council had provided financial assistance for the care of the claimant’s father before his death in a residential home. Those costs were in part recoverable as a civil debt. His father had given him the house by deed of gift. The regulations provided that the father was to be treated as still possessing property of which he had denuded himself to avoid payment of the charges The local authority sought an equitable charge over the property. The council had misapplied the subjective test, of whether the father had actually known sufficient of the scheme, and the need to test the actual purpose of the gift in the father’s mind. The son said the procedure lacked independence because of the potential conflict of interest and lack of independence of those making the decisions. The statutory scheme is a measure of welfare assistance, but not every part need be, and may not be covered by the Convention. The availability of judicial review was inadequate to correct that defect. There was a breach of the claimant’s article 6 rights, but not under article 14.

Judges:

Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

Times 21-Dec-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 986

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21, National Assistance (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 2977)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedYule v South Lanarkshire Council for Judicial Review of A Decision of South Lanarkshire Council SCS 15-Aug-2000
. .
CitedRegina on the Application of Kathro and Others and Llantwit Fardre Community Council v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council Admn 6-Jul-2001
Local residents sought to challenge the proposed determination of a planning application which involved a private finance initiative. One of the grounds was that the use of a negotiated tendering procedure for the purposes of the PFI was contrary to . .
Appealed toThe Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromThe Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Benefits

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.166918

Thames Valley Holdings Led, Re Land at Ockwells Road: UTLC 16 Aug 2011

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – preliminary issues – 2 previous unsuccessful applications – National Trust objecting – whether application should be struck out – held it should not be – compensation – whether ground (aa) should be struck out on basis that money would not be adequate compensation – held it should not be – Law of Property Act 1925 s 84(1)(aa) and (c)

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 325 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445680

Halifax General Insurance Services v Teignbridge District Council: UTLC 7 Jun 2011

COMPENSATION – Tree Preservation Order – refusal of consent to crown reduce a mature oak tree alleged to have caused subsidence to residential dwelling – claim for cost of remedial works and preventative measures – compensation pounds 7,602 – Town and Country Planning (Trees) Regulations 1999

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 213 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445662

Perkins, Re Peplins Way, Brookmans Park: UTLC 16 Jun 2011

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – covenant restricting development to one dwelling per plot – proposal to erect additional house within grounds of existing property – objectors’ entitlement to benefit – whether Building Scheme – whether proposed use of land reasonable – whether practical benefits of substantial value or advantage secured by the restriction – whether modification would cause injury – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, section 84(1)(aa) and (c)

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 219 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 84(1)(aa) 84(1)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445664

Southern Centre of Theosophy Incorporated v The State of South Australia: PC 15 Dec 1981

(Australia) Lord Wilberforce described accretion as: ‘a doctrine which gives recognition to the fact that where land is bounded by water, the forces of nature are likely to cause changes in the boundary between the land and the water. Where these changes are gradual and imperceptible (a phrase considered further below), the law considers the title to the land as applicable to the land as it may be so changed from time to time. This may be said to be based on grounds of convenience and fairness. Except in cases where a substantial and recognisable change in boundary has suddenly taken place (to which the doctrine of accretion does not apply), it is manifestly convenient to continue to regard the boundary between land and water as being where it is from day to day or year to year. To do so is also fair. If part of an owner’s land is taken from him by erosion, or diluvion (ie advance of the water) it would be most inconvenient to regard the boundary as extending into the water: the landowner is treated as losing a portion of his land. So, if an addition is made to the land from what was previously water, it is only fair that the landowner’s title should extend to it. The doctrine of accretion, in other words, is one which arises from the nature of land ownership from, in fact, the long-term ownership of property inherently subject to gradual processes of change.’

Judges:

Lord Wilberforce

Citations:

[1981] UKPC 41

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedLynn Shellfish Ltd and Others v Loose and Another SC 13-Apr-2016
The court was asked as to the extent of an exclusive prescriptive right (ie an exclusive right obtained through a long period of use) to take cockles and mussels from a stretch of the foreshore on the east side of the Wash, on the west coast of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.443981

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd: CA 17 May 2018

Judges:

Lewison, Floyd, David Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1100, [2018] WLR(D) 304, [2019] Ch 331, [2018] 2 P and CR 18, [2019] 2 WLR 330

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromGeneral Motors UK Ltd v The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd ChD 30-Nov-2016
The claimants had had a long standing licence to discharge water in the defendant’s canal. Having failed to pay the license fee, the licence was revoked. The claimants sought relief from forfeiture.
Held: Granted . .

Cited by:

At CAThe Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd SC 23-Oct-2019
Limits on relief from forfeiture of land
In the context of land, equitable relief is only available for forfeiture of property rights, as opposed to a right to possession under a contract. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Equity

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.616330

General Motors UK Ltd v The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd: ChD 30 Nov 2016

The claimants had had a long standing licence to discharge water in the defendant’s canal. Having failed to pay the license fee, the licence was revoked. The claimants sought relief from forfeiture.
Held: Granted

Judges:

His Honour Judge Behrens sitting as a Judge of the High Court

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 2960 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoGeneral Motors UK Ltd v The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd ChD 13-Jan-2017
. .
Appeal fromThe Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd CA 17-May-2018
. .
At First InstanceThe Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd SC 23-Oct-2019
Limits on relief from forfeiture of land
In the context of land, equitable relief is only available for forfeiture of property rights, as opposed to a right to possession under a contract. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.571984

Lanceley v Wirral Borough Council: UTLC 9 May 2011

COMPENSATION – Land Compensation Act 1973 Part I – depreciation by physical factors caused by the use of a new road – noise, vibration, dust, artificial lighting – comparables – compensation assessed at pounds 1,000.

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 175 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Damages

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440793

Between Bristol City Council v Aldford Two Llp: UTLC 30 Mar 2011

UTLC HOUSING – enforcement action – category 1 hazard – RPT quashing improvement notice – whether lawful to do so – whether certain factors wrongly taken into account – hazard awareness notice as alternative – held this was the appropriate enforcement action – appeal dismissed – Housing Act 2004 ss 5, 28

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 130 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Housing

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440776

Yarde v London Borough of Newham: UTLC 29 Mar 2011

COMPENSATION – compulsory purchase – dwellinghouse – whether to be valued when CPO made or on vesting date – value in good condition – comparables – cost of necessary works – whether deduction to be made for risk and profit – compensation determined at pounds 200,000

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 125 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440780

Re Thistledew, 6A Nottingham Road: UTLC 18 Feb 2011

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – application to modify a restriction so as to reduce the size of a shared vehicle turning area – whether practical benefits of substantial value or advantage secured by the restriction – whether money will be adequate compensation for loss or disadvantage -whether express or implied consent – whether modification will cause injury – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, s84(1)(aa), (b) and (c)

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 69 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440774

Poole v South West Water Ltd: UTLC 9 Mar 2011

COMPENSATION – water – disturbance resulting from installation of water main across agricultural land – surveyor’s fee – all other surveyor’s fees in connection with the works based on Ryde’s scale (1996) plus 20 per cent – whether claimant’s surveyor entitled to a higher fee based on amount of time spent – surveyor’s fee determined on time basis at pounds 3,219.50 – Water Industry Act 1991, s159

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 84 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440779

George Wimpey Bristol Ltd v Gloucestershire Housing Association Ltd: UTLC 14 Mar 2011

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – open land – covenant prohibiting erection of any building – application to modify to permit construction of 17 dwellinghouses and seven garages – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925 s84(1) (aa).

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 91 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440778

The Nottinghamshire and City of Nottingham Fire Authority v Gladman Commercial Properties: ChD 20 Apr 2011

The claimants sought directions in the course of a claima for specific performance of contract for the sale of former fire service premises.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1918 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Land

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.434884

Helden v Strathmore Ltd: CA 11 May 2011

The defendant appealed against an order finding valid a charge in favour of the claimant despite non-compliance with the 2000 Act.
Lord Neuberger MR said as to the 1989 Act: Section 2 is concerned with contracts for the creation or sale of legal estates or interests in land, not with documents that actually create or transfer such estates or interests. So a contract to transfer a freehold or a lease in the future, a contract to grant a lease in the future or a contract for a mortgage in the future are all within the reach of the section, provided of course that the ultimate subject matter is land. However, an actual transfer, conveyance or assignment, an actual lease, or an actual mortgage are not within the scope of section 2 at all.
[Section 2] was directed to tightening up the formalities required for contracts for the creation or transfer of interests or estates in land and it was not concerned with documents that actually create or transfer legal estates or interests in land . .’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Smith, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 542

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKeay and Another v Morris Homes (West Midlands) Ltd CA 11-Jul-2012
The claimants sought damages alleging breach of contract. The defendants argued that the contract related to land, and since it was an oral agreement it was unenforceable under the 1989 Act.
Held: It was not possible that a contract which was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Financial Services

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.439649

Kirklees Council v Information Commissioner and Pali Ltd: UTAA 10 Mar 2011

Information rights – Environmental information – general -‘ the Commissioner’s determination that all of the information requested must be made available by the Appellant to the Second Respondent for examination in situ without charge, and that the Appellant was in breach of its duties under the Regulations in declining to do so, was correct and is confirmed. For the avoidance of doubt, this only requires the Appellant to make available for examination information held by it, whether electronically or in physical form, from which a set of answers to the standard enquiries on form Con29R in relation to the property can be derived. It does not require the Appellant to conduct any more refined evaluation of any such information or its actual relevance (if any) to any such enquiry, or to provide any information in the form of actual or putative answers to the enquiries themselves. Nor does it require the disclosure of any personal data contrary to Regulation 13.’

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 104 (AAC), [2011] AACR 44

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Information Regulations 2004, Local Land Charges Act 1975 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Local Government, Information

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.433518