Tag: Land

Maroudas v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: Admn 9 Mar 2009

Application was to quash the decision of the Secretary of State, made by an inspector in May 2008 following a hearing, to confirm a modification order made in response to an application originally made under section 53(5). It had had several failings, but these had been addressed by the authority.
Held: Mackie QC upheld the inspector’s decision to treat the application as validly made by the relevant date. As he observed, there had been nothing ‘opportunistic’ about the application, made long before any hint of the proposals which led in due course to the 2006 legislation. Although he was bound by the Winchester decision, and he accepted that the defects in the original application could not be treated as ‘minor’, he was entitled to look ‘at the substance of the matter’, which was that: ‘by the time the letter of 22 April 1997 was written it was perfectly clear what the application related to. There was a map, as one sees from ‘enclosed is a summary plan of the application’ in the letter of 25 March 1997, and a signature and a date. No one would, or could, have been misled about what happened after that. Mr Maroudas rightly had to accept that he would have no grounds at all for his application if, instead of the exchange of letters, the council had gone through the bureaucratic, or some would say necessary, step of returning the form to [the applicant] to sign and amend, rather than resolving the matter on an exchange of correspondence. That seems to me to move proper strictness into unnecessary bureaucracy . . .’

Judges:

Mackie QC HHJ

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 628 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Maroudas v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs CA 18-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against an order refusing his request to quash a footpath modification order. The request had not been signed as required.
Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘subject to the de minimis principle, an application must strictly . .
Cited – Trail Riders Fellowship and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Dorset County Council SC 18-Mar-2015
Objection had been made that a plan, used to register a right of way before it would disappear if un-registered, was to the wrong scale and that therefore the application was ineffetive.
Held: The Council’s appeal failed. The plan was too . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Administrative

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.330989

Armia Ltd v Daejan Developments Ltd: HL 21 Feb 1979

The respondents had sought specific implement of an obligation under missives for the payment of the purchase price of land.
Held: There can be no abandonment of a right by way of confession unless the party concerned is aware that he has the right in question and acts in such a way as to show that he has in fact abandoned it. Lord Keith of Kinkel he set out the definition of waiver and the courts approach thereto: ‘The word ‘waiver’ connotes the abandonment of a right. (See: Banning v Wright [1972] 1 WLR 972 per Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone LC at p. 979, Lord Reid at p. 981). The abandonment may be express, or it may be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case . . I conclude from these cases that the question whether or not there has been a waiver of a right is a question of fact, to be determined objectively upon a consideration of all the relevant evidence.’

Judges:

Diplock, Edmund-Davies, Fraser of Tullybelton LL

Citations:

[1979] UKHL 8, 1979 SLT 147, 1979 SC (HL) 56

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Contract, Land

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279743

Walker v Whitwell: HL 15 Dec 1915

A witness to a deed cannot adhibit his signature to the deed after the death of the party to whose signature he was a witness.

Judges:

Earl Loreburn, Lord Dunedin, Lord Atkinson, Lord Shaw, and Lord WrenBury

Citations:

[1915] UKHL 6, 1916 SC (HL) 75, 1916 1 SLT 2, [1915] UKHL 129, 53 SLR 129

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Land

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279672

Dennis and Another v Davies (B20 (Ch)): ChD 21 Nov 2008

The claimants sought to enforce a restrictive covenant to restrain a neighbour building an extension.
Held: A building could be a source of annoyance and therefore a breach of the particular covenant. The requirement for the builder’s permission was not inconsistent with an additional duty under the covenant. The test for annoyance the test is an objective one and must be judged by robust and common sense standards. The building could well be a source of annoyance and a breach of the covenant. An extension also did amount to a building within the covenant, and required the developer’s consent. The document relied on for this purpose was not such.

Judges:

Behrens J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC B20 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Tod-Heatley v Benham 1888
What was ‘annoyance’ between neighbours
The court considered how to construe a covenant in a lease ‘nor do or wittingly or willingly cause or suffer to be done any act, matter, or thing in or upon or about the said premises, which shall or may be or grow to the annoyance, nuisance, . .
Cited – Wood v Cooper 1894
There was a long lease of land with a dwellinghouse built on it. The lease contained covenants: ‘not to erect or build or cause to be erected or built upon the said piece of ground thereby demised, without the previous license in writing of the . .
Cited – Hunter 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278840

Smith and Another v Muller and others: CA 17 Dec 2008

Judges:

Tuckey LJ, Wall LJ, Rimer LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1425

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Harris v Flower CA 1904
The servient land-owner alleged an excessive user by which it was attempted to impose an additional burden on the servient tenement in the use of a right of way for obtaining access to a factory erected partly on the land to which the right of way . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278821

Harris v Flower: CA 1904

The servient land-owner alleged an excessive user by which it was attempted to impose an additional burden on the servient tenement in the use of a right of way for obtaining access to a factory erected partly on the land to which the right of way was appurtenant (‘the Pink Land’) and partly on other land (‘the White Land’). A claim was put forward on behalf of the plaintiffs that the right of way had been abandoned, on the ground that, as it was practically impossible to separate the lawful from the excessive user, the right of way could not be used at all.
Held: The appeal, based upon this contention, failed. There had been no abandonment, but the user of the way for access to the buildings so far as they were situate upon land to which the right of way was not appurtenant was in excess of the rights of the defendants, and a declaration was made accordingly, with liberty to apply. An alteration to provide for a mode of enjoyment by the dominant tenement with the effect of increasing the restriction beyond its legitimate limit will not be allowed. The use of an easement cannot be extended, beyond the scope of the grant, to impose a burden greater than that which the servient owner agreed to accept. A right to pass over plot A to reach plot B cannot be used as a means of access to plot C, unless it was so used at the time of the grant.
Vaughan-Williams LJ rejected a claim of a right of way for land the claim as excessive, on the basis that the uses for the additional land: ‘cannot be said to be mere adjuncts to the honest user of the right of way for the purposes of the Pink land . . It is not a mere case of user of the pink land with some usual offices on the White Land connected with the buildings on the Pink Land.’ and
‘I cannot help thinking that there not only may be, but there must be, many things done in respect of the buildings on the white land which cannot be said to be mere adjuncts to the honest user of the right of way for the purposes of the pink land . . under these circumstances it seems to me that, notwithstanding the fact that the buildings on the white and on the pink lands are intended to be used jointly for one purpose, yet that consideration does not exclude the inference that the use of the way is for the purpose of giving access to land to which the right of way is not appurtenant.’
The use of the factory would increase the volume of traffic on the way beyond the level permitted by the grant: ‘This particular burthen could not have arisen without the user of the white land as well as of the pink. It is not a mere case of user of the pink land, with some usual offices on the white land connected with the buildings on the pink land. The whole of object of this scheme is to include the profitable user of the white land as well as the pink, and I think access is to be used for the very purpose of enabling the white land to be used profitably as well as the pink, and I think we ought under these circumstances to restrain this user.’
Romer LJ said: ‘I think that it is impossible to say that this large building is to be regarded as if wholly erected on the land coloured pink, nor can it be said that every user of the way for the purposes of the land coloured white is one for the proper enjoyment of the land coloured pink. I will take one instance. The defendant has used, and claims a right to use, this right of way for the purpose of carrying building materials for the part of his buildings on the land coloured white. That, to my mind, is a user of the right of way for passage over the land coloured pink for the enjoyment of this land coloured white. It is impossible to say that by reason of one building being on both lands the defendant has made the right of way which was granted for the enjoyment of the one a right of way for the enjoyment of both, and that is what the defendant is really doing. That would substantially enlarge the grant of the right of way. The servient tenement is not obliged to submit to the carrying of building materials for the purpose I have indicated; and other incidences might easily be given which would result in using the right of way for purposes of the land coloured white, and not for the true and proper enjoyment of the land to which the way was appurtenant.’ and ‘The law really is not in dispute. If a right of way [is] granted for the enjoyment of Close A, the grantee, because he owns or acquires Close B, cannot use the way in substance for passing over Close A to Close B . . in the present case the defendant might have erected a building on the land coloured pink [the dominant tenement] and used it for a contractor’s business, and made use of the right of way for that purpose; but what he is really doing here is, under the guise of the enjoyment of the dominant tenement, to try and make the right of way become a right of way for the enjoyment of both lands, the pink and the white [the white land being a non-dominant tenement which the defendant also owned and which adjoined the dominant tenement], and [thereby use] the land coloured pink as a mere continuation of the right of passage from the pink to the white. That is not what is justified by the grant, and the plaintiff is entitled to say it is in excess of the grant, and a declaration in his favour ought to be made accordingly.’
Cozens-Hardy LJ said: ‘What is the right of way? It is a right of way for all purposes – that is, for all purposes with reference to the dominant tenement. The question is whether the defendant has not attempted, and is not attempting, to enlarge the area of the dominant tenement. The land coloured white is entirely landlocked by the acts of the defendant. The only access is by the passage over the land coloured pink; and it is, in my judgment, impossible to use the right of way so as to enlarge the dominant tenement in that manner.’

Judges:

Vaughan-Williams LJ, Romer LJ, Cozens-Hardy LJ

Citations:

(1904) 74 LJ Ch 127, (1904) 91 LT 816

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Skull And Another v Glenister And Others 1864
A right of way appurtenant to land passes to the tenant by a parol demise of the land, though nothiiig is said about it at the time of the demise. – A, having a right of way to D close, demised the close to B. The latter, being possessed of an . .
Cited – Williams v James 1867
A right of way had been granted over the plaintiff’s land for the benefit of ‘Nine acre field’ in its ordinary use as a field. Hay grown on both Nine acre field and the adjoining ‘Parrott’s land’ had been mowed and stored on Nine acre field in the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wall v Collins and Another CA 17-May-2007
Properties, when leasehold, had acquired rights of way by prescription over neighbouring land. The freehold interests were acquired, and the claimant now appealed a decision that the right of way acquired under his lease had disappeared.
Held: . .
Cited – Nickerson v Barraclough CA 2-Jan-1981
The plaintiff had bought land landlocked save over a bridge and a lane beonging to the defendant leading to the highway. He claimed a right of way relying on a conditional grant from 1906, section 62 of the 1925 Act, and also asserted a way by . .
Affirmed – Peacock and Another v Custins and Another CA 14-Nov-2000
The conveyance of a field constituting the dominant land to the claimants was expressed to be subject to the benefit of a right of way over land owned by the defendants, enabling the claimants to reach the dominant land ‘at all times and for all . .
Cited – EDF Energy Networks (EPN) Plc v BOH Ltd and Others ChD 4-Dec-2009
. .
Cited – Site Developments (Ferndown) Ltd and Others v Cuthbury Ltd and Others ChD 13-Jan-2010
A covenant was made in 1926 with ‘the Vendor and his successors in title the owner or owners for the time being of the Canford Estate of which the land hereby transferred and conveyed forms part’. Vos J held that it could only be enforced by the . .
Cited – Smith and Another v Muller and others CA 17-Dec-2008
. .
Cited – Wall v Collins and Collins Chd 11-Aug-2009
The claimant sought orders to protect his freedom to use a right of way over neighbouring land. . .
Cited – Das and others v Linden Mews Ltd CA 1-May-2002
. .
Cited – Cdc2020 Plc v Ferreira CA 5-May-2005
. .
Cited – Wilkins and Another v Lewis ChD 29-Jul-2005
. .
Cited – Sinclair v Morrison, McNealis LRA 9-May-2012
LRA Easements and Profits A Prendre – Acquisition of easement by prescription; easement on foot over existing right of way granted by deed; identification of the dominant tenement; whether user as of right; . .
Cited – Williams, Williams v Madden, Goodsell, Hubbard (Easements and Profits A Prendre) LRA 17-May-2012
LRA Prescriptive right of way established by the Applicants for the benefit of their home over a strip of roadway belonging to the Respondents who were on notice of their use of that land. The use of the way with . .
Cited – Giles v Tarry and Another CA 21-Jun-2012
. .
Cited – Price and Another v Nunn CA 31-Jul-2013
. .
Applied – Jobson v Record CA 1998
A right of way was granted for all purposes connected with the use and enjoyment of the dominant tenement as agricultural land. The dominant tenement was used for the purpose of storing timber felled on neighbouring land and the question was whether . .
Cited – Miller v Tipling 1918
(Ontario Court of Appeal) Mulock CJ Ex said: ‘The law is well established that a right of way appurtenant to a particular close must not be used colourably for the real purpose of reaching a different adjoining close. This does not mean that where . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Leading Case

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.252423

Chantry Estates (South East) Ltd v Anderson and Another: ChD 3 Oct 2008

The claimant sought specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. The purchase was under an option agreement. The option was exercisable on the grant of planning permission within a certain period, extensible in the case of an appeal.
Held: The contract did not impose much by way of obligation on the buyer and was one sided. There was no reasonable prospect of the defendant succeeding, and summary judgment was granted.

Judges:

Morgan J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2457 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Contract, Land

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277022

Coal Authority v Davidson and Another: TCC 9 Sep 2008

The authority sought to appeal orders for the purchase of the properties of the respondents by the authority after they had been damaged by coal mining works.

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2180 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991, Coal Mining Subsidence (Arbitration Schemes) Regulations 1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276495

Hockerill College, Regina (on the Application of) v Hertfordshire County Council: Admn 10 Jul 2008

The school sought judicial review of a decision to refuse a Special Extinguishment Order to close a footpath crossing its playing fields.

Judges:

Mackie J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2060 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 118B, Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276238

Tamares (Vincent Square) Ltd v Fairpoint Properties (Vincent Square) Ltd: ChD 4 Sep 2006

Dispute as to right of light – proposed development likely to breach right for dominant tenement.

Judges:

Gabriel Moss QC

Citations:

(2006) 41 EG 226, [2006] EWHC 3589 (Ch), [2007] 1 WLR 2148

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Tamares (Vincent Square) Ltd. v Fairpoint Properties (Vincent Square) Ltd ChD 8-Feb-2007
The defendant had been found liable for infringing the claimant’s right of light. The court considered the proper measure of damages.
Held: The court should ask what might be the fair result of a hypothetical negiation for the sale of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.253148

Jelson Ltd v Derby City Council: ChD 30 Jun 1999

Agreements under the planning acts remained subject to the general law requiring formalities for contracts for the sale of land. Where two landowners had an understanding as to the expectations for the division of responsibility for provision of affordable housing between their respective plots, one could not be obliged to continue where the contract was incomplete. A planning agreement allowed one party to require the other to sell land to a nominated beneficiary at a discounted price. This amounted to a contract to sell the land, and so, in order to be enforceable, it had to be signed by all the parties. It was permissible to blue pencil certain parts of the agreement relating to this aspect and leave the rest enforceable.

Judges:

Mr David Mackie QC

Citations:

Times 22-Aug-1999, Gazette 30-Jun-1999, [1999] 39 EG 149

Statutes:

Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – McCausland and Another v Duncan Lawrie Ltd and Another CA 18-Jun-1996
The parties entered into a written contract for the sale of land which, in error, provided for completion on a Sunday. The parties varied the date to the Friday but did not execute a new contract which would comply with section 2(1) of the 1989 Act. . .

Cited by:

Distinguished – Nweze and Another v Nwoko CA 29-Mar-2004
The parties had settled their dispute in an oral compromise agreement under which it was agreed that land would be sold at the best price reasonably obtainable. One now argued this was unenforceable as an agreement for the disposal of land requiring . .
Appeal from – Jelson Ltd v Derbyshire County Council CA 1-Aug-1999
Section 2 of the 1989 Act had to bite at the point where a party could be compelled, in certain circumstances, which could or could not come about, to sell or dispose of an interest in land. The agreement here contained in effect an option for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.82509

Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd and Executors of J V Longmore v Secretary of State for Environment and Secretary of State for Transport: Admn 10 Jun 1997

The date of the acquiring proposal is the date to consider as to planning aspects on deciding whether to quash a certificate of appropriate development.

Judges:

Dyson J

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 538

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1961 22(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Secretary of State for Environment v Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Limited and Secretary of State for Environment v Newell; Longmore and Longmore (the Executors of J V Longmore) CA 11-Jun-1998
Land was to be valued at the date of the proposal to acquire it compulsorily allowing a discount for any damage to the value incurred by the long expectation of that particular proposal and its consequences and not by reference to another proposal . .
At first instance – Newell and others v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another; Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another HL 17-Feb-2000
Where a certificate of appropriate development was issued for land to be acquired compulsorily, the land was to be valued at the date of the proposal to acquire it compulsorily allowing a discount for any damage to the value incurred by the long . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Land

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.137483

Fitzroy Robinson Ltd v Mentmore Towers Ltd: TCC 26 Nov 2009

The court considered the approach to be taken when considering an ‘ordinary’ adjournment of a forthcoming trial date; where the adjournment was said to be necessitated by the parties’ failure to comply with the earlier directions of the court, which non-compliance, so it was said, made a fair trial difficult if not impossible.

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3070 (TCC), 128 Con LR 91, [2010] CP Rep 15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.393354

The Royal Oak Property Company Ltd v Iktilat and Another: ChD 23 Jul 2008

The defendant was registered proprietor of two properties, but resisted orders for sale of them under charging orders, saying that he was not the beneficial owner of them.

Judges:

Floyd J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1703 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charging Orders Act 1979 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271106

Bocardo Sa v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and Another: ChD 24 Jul 2008

The defendant had obtained a licence under the Act to extract oil from beneath its land. To do so, it had to drill at a deep level under the claimant’s land. It did so without the claimant’s permission. The claimant sought damages in trespass.
Held: The intrusion was a trespass. Damages were awarded based on the licence fees which might have been charged.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1756 (Ch), [2008] 2 P and CR 23, [2009] 1 All ER 517, [2008] NPC 99, [2008] 30 EG 83

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Petroleum (Production) Act 1934

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa CA 15-Jun-2009
The appellant had taken out a licence to drill for oil on its land. To maximise its return it drilled at a deep level out under the claimant’s land. It now appealed against a finding that this was a trespass, and that it should pay damages on a . .
At First Instance – Star 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.

Licensing, Land

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271040

Young and Another v Brooks and Another: CA 22 May 2008

Appeal from order as to extent of right of way. Lord Hoffmann’s five principles of interpretation in the Investors Compensation Scheme case apply as much to the interpretation of an express grant of an easement as to that of a contract.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 816

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Davill v Pull and Another CA 10-Dec-2009
The court was asked to interpret grants of rights of way over land. The claimant intended to increase the use of the right. The servient owners objected. The claimant appealed against refusal of relief.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270834

Landlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Company Ltd: ChD 8 Jul 2008

Judges:

Hodge QC J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1582 (Ch), [2008] NPC 82, [2008] 28 EG 113 (CS)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 1(6)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor CA 2002
New CPR govern Indemnity Costs awards
The defendant had successfully defended the main claim and now appealed against the refusal of an order for costs on an indemnity basis even though judge thought that the claimants had behaved unreasonably. He had said that some conduct deserving of . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Landlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Company Ltd CA 20-Feb-2009
Guarantee beyond term was unreasonable
The tenant objected that the landlord’s conditional consent to an assignment was unreasonable. The purchaser was a dormant company which had never traded. The clause referred to ‘a respectable and responsible assignee or sub-tenant’. The tenant had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270707

French v Barcham and Another: ChD 4 Jul 2008

The court was asked the extent to which a beneficial tenant in common who continues in occupation of a property following the bankruptcy of the other beneficial tenant in common ought to compensate the bankrupt’s estate for that continued occupation.
Held: The 1996 Act did not provide an exhaustive regime for determining rights as between co-owners, and the judge had been wrong to require the trustee in bankruptcy to provide some basis under the Act to make his claim. If necessary the court could look to its equitable jurisdiction to find a basis for such a claim.

Judges:

Blackburne J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1505 (Ch), Times 24-Jul-2008

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 12 815

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Insolvency

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270630

Ezekiel and Another v Kohali and Another: ChD 11 Apr 2008

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 734 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ezekiel and Another v Kohali and Another CA 30-Jan-2009
Each side sought specific performance of a contract set out in a Heads of Agreement document, but one sought an abatement in the price, saying that the seller was unable to deliver the title promised. The seller replied that the document did not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270625

Tedstone v Bourne Leisure Ltd (T/A Thoresby Hall Hotel and Spa): CA 7 May 2008

A leisure centre appealed a finding of liability under the 1957 Act after a customer slipped on water by a jacuzzi and injured herself, saying that the judge imposed too high a duty of care.
Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘If the claimant can prove facts which support the inference that the defendant was at fault, an evidential burden, that is, a burden to call evidence which would tend to rebut that inference, passes to the defendant. In this case, however, the facts proved by the claimant were not in my view sufficient to support the inference that the defendant was at fault. There was no evidence that the defendant knew that a significant pool of water was likely to appear in the area in which the claimant fell, or indeed anywhere else in the general area, other than at the foot of the steps leading out of the Jacuzzi, and accordingly the evidence called by the claimant did not point to the conclusion that prima facie there was a breach of duty on the part of the defendant. ‘

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 654

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ward v Tesco Stores Ltd CA 1976
The claimant slipped on the contents of a yoghurt pot which had spilled onto the floor of the supermarket. The defendants gave evidence of frequent inspection and sweeping of the supermarket floor with instructions to the staff to clear up spillages . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Land

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270529

Cordwell, Re: LT 7 May 2008

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – building scheme – proposed bungalow -practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – outlook – overlooking – traffic – peace and quiet – precedent – integrity of estate – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, s 84(1)(aa).

Citations:

[2008] EWLands LP – 40 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270494

Tillotson, Re: 2 Middleton Drive: LT 6 Jun 2008

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – proposed detached house at entrance to exclusive cul-de-sac – practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – outlook – effect upon amenities – precedent – integrity of system of covenants – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, ss 84(1)(aa) and (c).

Citations:

[2008] EWLands LP – 56 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Land

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270504

(Un-named): LT 15 Apr 2008

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – dwellinghouse – restriction preventing any permanent building or structure to be erected without seller’s consent – application to modify to permit erection of large garden shed – whether restriction obsolete – whether those entitled to benefit of restriction agreed to its modification – whether injury to objectors – application granted – nil compensation payable – Law of Property Act 1925, s84(1)(a), (aa), (b) and (c).

Citations:

[2008] EWLands LP – 34 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 84(1)(a) (aa), (b) and (c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270489

Bell v Long and others: ChD 16 Jun 2008

Land had been sold by administrative receivers appointed under a charge. The owner said that the lands had been sold at an undervalue.
Held: The action failed. The claimant could not show any breach of duty or that the assessments made were not reasonable. ‘It is now clearly established that a receiver appointed by a mortgagee to sell mortgaged property in order to recover or reduce the mortgage debt is effectively in the same position as the mortgagee and owes a duty in equity to all those interested in the equity of redemption to obtain a proper price for the property. He is not however a trustee of his power of sale for the mortgagor and accordingly can choose the time of sale even if that turns out to be disadvantageous to the debtor who could have recovered more had the property been sold later. ‘

Judges:

Patten J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1273 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Raja v Austin Gray (A Firm) CA 19-Dec-2002
A mortgagee is at all times free to consult his own interests alone as to whether and when to exercise his power of sale. The relationship and duties owed by the receiver are equitable only. Peter Gibson LJ said: ‘(1) A mortgagee with the power of . .
Cited – Cuckmere Brick Co Ltd v Mutual Finance Ltd CA 1971
A mortgagee selling as mortagee in possession must ‘take reasonable care to obtain the true value of the property at the moment he chooses to sell it’ and obtain the best price for the property reasonably obtainable on the open market. However, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.269727

Cumbernauld and Kilsyth District Council v Dollar Land (Cumbernauld) Ltd: SCS 1992

(Inner House) When Cumbernauld town centre was built, a walkway was provided between the shopping centre and residential areas. It was used for many years, but then closed to prevent crime. The authority sought an interdict to keep it open as a public right of way. The court discussed the application of prescription to public rights of way. Lord President Hope said: ‘where the user is of such amount and in such manner as would reasonably be regarded as being the assertion of a public right, the owner cannot stand by and ask that his inaction be ascribed to his good nature or to tolerance. If his position is to be that the user is by his leave and licence, he must do something to make the public aware of that fact so that they know that the route is being used by them only with his permission and not as of right.’ and ‘the occasional or irregular use of a path by hill walkers or by others who resort to the countryside can readily be distinguished from the continuous use of it by members of the public as a route from one public place to another. It seems to me to be clear, on an examination of all the later authorities, that a proprietor who allows a way over his land to be used by the public in the way the public would be expected to use it if there was a public right of way cannot claim that that use must be ascribed to tolerance, if he did nothing to limit or regulate that use at any time during the prescriptive period.’

Judges:

Lord President (Hope)

Citations:

1992 SLT 1035, [1992] CLY 6215, 1992 SC 357

Statutes:

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 3(3)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appealed to – Cumbernauld and Kilsyth District Council v Dollar Land (Cumbernauld) Ltd HL 22-Jul-1993
A walkway had existed from the town centre to residential areas. When the land was acquired the defendant new owners sought to close the walkway. The authority asserted that a public right of way had been acquired.
Held: There was no need to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Cumbernauld and Kilsyth District Council v Dollar Land (Cumbernauld) Ltd HL 22-Jul-1993
A walkway had existed from the town centre to residential areas. When the land was acquired the defendant new owners sought to close the walkway. The authority asserted that a public right of way had been acquired.
Held: There was no need to . .
Cited – Regina 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: . .
Cited – Lewis, 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 . .
Cited – Barkas, Regina (on The Application of ) v North Yorkshire County Council and Another SC 6-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to the registration of a playing field as a ‘town or village green’. Local residents asserted that their use of the land, having been ‘as of right’ required the registration. They now appealed against rejection of that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.187767

Lall and Another v Transport for London: LT 31 Jan 2008

LT COMPENSATION – Land Compensation Act 1973 Part I – house affected by road alterations acquisition by agreement of right to enter land to build wall for purpose of works compensation paid pursuant to this – held claim under Part I precluded – 1973 Act s 8

Citations:

[2008] EWLands LCA – 102 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266318

Bradford and Bingley Plc v Cutler: CA 18 Jan 2008

The borrower fell into arrears when he lost his job. Benefits payments were made toward the debt under the 1992 Act. Those stopped, and the house was repossessed. The property was sold, and the claimant eventually sought to recover the shortfall. They relied on the last benefits payment as acknowledgement of the debt, saying it was paid as agent for the borrower. The borrower said that their was no relationship of agency.
Held: The Benefits Agency payments went to reduce the borrower’s liability and were for his benefit. They were made as his agent and constituted an acknowledgment of the debt.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 74

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Mortgage Interest Payments) Act 1992, Limitation Act 1980 29(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Limitation

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264658

Ofulue and Another v Bossert: CA 29 Jan 2008

The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to deny the claimants’ title.
Held: The appeal failed. A finding by the ECHR that a particular area falls within the contracting states’ margin of appreciation is therefore a signal to the national judge that the decision of the national authorities as to the content of rights within that area should receive appropriate respect. The court was to apply Pye -v- United Kingdom. The margin of appreciation given to a national court was not something to be retested on each adverse possession case. A person believing himself to be a tenant may still be in adverse possession, even if his belief that he is a tenant is incorrect. The statement in the pleadings did not amount to an acknowledgement.

Judges:

Arden LJ, May LJ, Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 7, [2008] HRLR 20, [2008] 3 WLR 1253, [2008] UKHRR 447, [2009] Ch 1, [2008] NPC 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 29, Land Registration Act 1925 75(1), Human Rights Act 1998 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another HL 4-Jul-2002
The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had . .
Applied – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-2007
UK Advers Possession Law – Not Compliant
The claimant had said that the UK law which allowed it to lose land by virtue of twelve year’s occupation by a squatter, interfered with its right to ownership of property.
Held: The UK law on adverse possession did comply with the Convention. . .
Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-2005
The claimants had been the registered proprietors of land, they lost it through the adverse possession of former tenants holding over. They claimed that the law had dispossessed them of their lawful rights.
Held: The cumulative effect of the . .
Cited – Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin’ Ltd HL 25-Apr-2007
Belfast had failed to license sex shops. The company sought review of the decision not to grant a licence.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The refusal was not a denial of the company’s human rights: ‘If article 10 and article 1 of . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Miailhe v France (No 2) ECHR 26-Sep-1996
Hudoc Preliminary objection joined to merits (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (ratione materiae); No violation of . .
No longer correct – Beaulane Properties Ltd v Palmer ChD 23-Mar-2005
The paper owner sought possession of land. The defendant said he had acquired a possessory title. The land was registered.
Held: The claimant’s human rights under article 1 were engaged. To be justifiable, the interference in that right had to . .
Cited – Powell v McFarlane ChD 1977
Intention to Establish Adverse Possession of Land
A squatter had occupied the land and defended a claim for possession. The court discussed the conditions necessary to establish an intention to possess land adversely to the paper owner.
Held: Slade J said: ‘It will be convenient to begin by . .
Cited – Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran CA 13-Feb-1989
The parties’ respective properties were separated by a fence or hedge and the true owner had no access to the disputed land. In 1967 the Defendants’ predecessors in title began to maintain the land by mowing the grass and trimming the hedges and . .
Cited – Lodge (T/A JD Lodge) v Wakefield Metropolitan Council CA 21-Mar-1995
The plaintiff had formerly been a tenant of the defendant under an informal tenancy. No rent had been paid since 1974. He claimed to have acquired the land by adverse possession. He gave evidence at trial that if he had been asked to pay rent at any . .
Cited – Re Flynn (no 2) 1969
An acknowledgement of title to restart a limitation period must be precisely focused on a disputed right. . .
Cited – Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka 1977
A debtor can only be held to have acknowledged the claim if he has in effect admitted his legal liability to pay that which the plaintiff seeks to recover. An acknowledgement of part only of a debt cannot operate to acknowledge more.
Kerr J . .
Cited – Markfield Investments Ltd v Evans CA 9-Nov-2000
The claimants were paper owners of land occupied by the defendant. The claimant said the acquiescence had been interrupted by an abortive court action by the claimant’s predecessor in title.
Held: With regard to any particular action the . .
Cited – BP Properties Ltd v Buckler CA 31-Jul-1987
The putative owner of the paper title wrote to the defendant who occupied the relevant property in October 1974 as follows: ‘Since we wish to help you as much as possible we are prepared to allow you to remain in occupation of the house and garden . .
Cited – Horner v Cartwright CA 11-Jul-1989
Stuart Smith LJ discussed the status of pleadings in a limitation as an acknowledgement: ‘It is unnecessary for the purpose of this judgment to deal with Mr. Horner’s submission that a statement in an action once it is contained in a pleading enures . .
Cited – Rush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council HL 3-Nov-1988
The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the . .
Cited – Re Gee and Co (Woolwich) Ltd 1975
Company accounts can acknowledge the company’s liability for debts as at the date at which the accounts are drawn up even if they are not finalised and signed until after that date. . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ofulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation, Human Rights

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264011

Merritt v Merritt: CA 27 Apr 1970

The parties had setted an arramngement for the house on splitting up. Following the agreement, she repaid the mortgage over time, and then requested the conveyance of the house under the agreement. She now appealed from an order refusing the transfer into her name.
Held: The appeal failed. Agreements between husband and wide are not generally intended to have legal effect, but ‘It is altogether different when the parties are not living in amity but are separated, or about to separate. They then bargain keenly. They do not rely on honourable understandings. They want everything cut and dried. It may safely be presumed that they intend to create legal relations.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Widgery, Karminski LJJ

Citations:

[1970] EWCA Civ 6, [1970] 2 All ER 760, [1970] 1 WLR 1211

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Land, Family

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262771

Winchester College, Warden and Fellows of and Another; Regina (on the Application of) v Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 28 Nov 2007

The applicants challenged the refusal of the defendant to alter the definitive right of way map.

Judges:

George Bartlett QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2786 (Admin), Times 08-May-2008

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 67, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Part III

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Winchester College and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 29-Apr-2008
The college appealed against modifications of definitive map to upgrade two footpaths to byways open to all traffic. The college was circled by footpaths which it wished to protect when the council constructed a new bypass.
Held: The College’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Local Government

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261598

RHJ Ltd v FT Patten (Holdings) Ltd and Another: ChD 13 Jul 2007

The court was asked whether the grant of a lease including a clause reserving: ‘All rights to the access of light or air from the said adjoining property known as Victoria House and Graham House to any of the windows of the demised property.’ allowed the tenant to claim a right of light over neighbouring land belonging to the landlord so as to prevent development. The lease also reserved to the landlord: ‘The full and free right to erect, build, re-build and or alter as they think fit at any time and from time to time any buildings or bays or projections to buildings on any land adjoining the demised property and/or on the opposite sides of the adjoining streets and access ways.’
Lewison J said: ‘The real distinction that the cases draw is, as it seems to me, between clauses that deal with the position as it exists at the date of the lease, and clauses that deal with what might happen in the future. Clauses of the first kind are effective only to prevent the creation of easements by express or implied grant; and do not prevent the subsequent acquisition of a right of light by prescription. Clauses of the second kind may prevent the acquisition of a right of light by prescription of what they authorise would interfere with light. If, on a fair reading of the clause they do, then it is not necessary, in my judgment, for the clause to use the word ‘light’. Nor, in my judgement, is it necessary for the clause to provide that the enjoyment of light is ‘permissive’. What is needed is that the clause makes it clear that the enjoyment of light is not absolute and indefeasible. The court must ‘find out the substance of the contract’: in other words it is a question of interpretation of the clause in question. Once the clause has been interpreted, that interpretation will have been ‘expressly’ agreed. A clause in a lease which authorises the landlord to build as he pleases is likely to satisfy the test.’

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1655 (Ch), [2007] NPC 90, [2008] L and TR 7, [2007] 4 All ER 744, [2007] 29 EG 143, [2007] 44 EG 182, [2007] 3 EGLR 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prescription Act 1832 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marlborough (West End) Ltd v Wilks Head and Eve ChD 20-Dec-1996
A dispute between neighbours was settled by a deed with the following clause: ‘IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND DECLARED that notwithstanding that the Building Owners have placed windows in that part of their new buildings which overlook the premises . .
Cited – Mitchell v Cantrill CA 1887
In 1864 Sir Humphrey de Trafford granted a 999 year lease of a dwelling house ‘with all rights and appurtenances, legal, used, or reputed, to the said plot of land, except rights, if any, restricting the free use of any adjoining land or the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – RHJ Ltd v FT Patten (Holdings) Ltd and Another CA 12-Mar-2008
A right to light is an unusual form of easement in the sense that it exists only with regard to the access to light to defined apertures in a building (as opposed to the dominant land generally) and its acquisition depends on actual enjoyment, not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Land

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258163

Yewbelle Ltd v London Green Developments Ltd and Another: CA 23 May 2007

The parties had entered into a contract for the development of land. Two circumstances operated to make it difficult or impossible, and the court was asked whether the contract was frustrated. The vendor was obliged to use all reasonable endeavours to secure the section 106 agreement and the purchaser was under no obligation to complete in the absence of such an agreement. One question was whether a term could be implied allowing the vendor to rescind if, despite the exercise of all reasonable endeavours, the stipulated agreement could not be achieved and the buyer did not waive that condition. Implicit in that question was that it was open to the buyer to waive the condition.
Held: The appeal failed (on this point) There was no inconsistency between the presence in the contract of a condition for the sole benefit of the buyer and the implication into the contract of a term to the effect that, if the seller complied with his obligation to use all reasonable endeavours but was unable to complete the section 106 agreement, the seller should give to the buyer an opportunity to complete the sale without that agreement (in other words, to waive the condition requiring that agreement) but if the buyer should choose not to complete the sale on that basis the vendor would have the right to terminate the contract.

Judges:

Waller LJ, Buxton LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 475, [2007] 2 EGLR 152

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Yewbelle Ltd v London Green Developments Ltd, Knightsbridge Green Limited ChD 8-Dec-2006
The court considered what were the obligations undertaken by a party contracting to use reasonable endeavours.
Held: The question is one of substance, not form, to be determined objectively. Lewison J said: ‘the essence of the obligation . .

Cited by:

Cited – Irwin v Wilson and Others ChD 23-Feb-2011
The claimant sought a declaration that his contract for the sale of leasehold property to the defendants had been lawfully terminated by a letter from his solicitors. The defendants had moved in before completion, but the claimant found himself . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Land

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.252508

Childs and Another v Vernon: CA 16 Mar 2007

The parties disputed the boundary between their properties, alleging various trespasses. The judge ordered a single expert witness. The court had been unable to establish the line of the boundary from the conveyances or the Land Registry plans. After the trial it appeared that the expert had met privately with one of the parties in breach of the guidelines in In re P.
Held: In practice the boundary line had been determined by the judge from the evidence of the non-expert witness. Any tainting of his evidence had not affected the outcome.

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 305

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – MP (a Child) v Mid-Kent Healthcare Trust CA 5-Nov-2001
In medical negligence cases, where non-medical expert evidence was ordered to be provided to the court on a joint basis, as should normally be the case, it would be inappropriate for that expert to be cross examined by either of the parties, and nor . .
Cited – Kingsmill v Millard 20-Jun-1855
Parke B set out the doctrine that a tenant acquiring adjoining land by adverse possession acquires it on behalf of his landlord: ‘It is laid down in all the cases – whether the inclosed land is part of the waste, or belongs to the landlord or a . .
Cited – Tower Hamlets v Barrett and Another CA 19-Jul-2005
The defendant tenants appealed an order for them to surrender possession of land which they claimed had been acquired by adverse possession. The buildings, including one which shared a party wall with the building owned by the defendants had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251390

Heronsgate Enterprises Ltd v Harman (Chesham) Ltd: CA 21 Jan 1993

The court described the duties of a vendor as trustee of the property after exchange but before completion: ‘It is well-established law that, subject always to the terms of the particular contract, a seller of property under a specifically enforceable contract is to be regarded after the contract has been made as holding the property as a trustee for the buyer. However, he is not a bare trustee. His trust obligations are limited in certain respects. For example, if, as is usually the case, he is entitled to remain in possession for the period after the contract has been made pending the date fixed for completion, he is entitled to keep and retain for his own benefit the rents and profits of the land arising during that period . . The seller must take care not to damage the property or to prejudice the buyer’s interest in the property of which, on completion, he will become the legal owner. But in general, within those limits he is entitled to the ordinary rents and profits, and for him to take steps to obtain them after contract and before the date fixed for completion, either by occupying and using the property himself or by permitting another to occupy and work the property in return for a rent, is not a breach of his duties as seller under a contract for sale.’ The release of a tipper from an indemnity agreement was not a matter of which a purchaser could complain, since the benefit of the agreement was not part of the property being sold: it was not annexed to the land, and was a benefit vested in the vendor under an agreement which, on completion, would not survive to bind or to benefit the purchaser as the new owner. If the purchaser could not compel the vendor to assign that benefit, then the purchaser could not complain if the vendor chose not to do so.

Judges:

Sir Donald Nicholls VC

Citations:

Unreported, 21 January 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Englewood Properties Limited v Patel and Another ChD 16-Feb-2005
The claimant was a property developer, which sought to sell a row of shops at auction. One lot was a Woolworths store, where the company owned both freehold and leasehold interests, with Woolworths occupying an underlease, which the claimant had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.223741

Mayor etc of Congleton v Pattison and Another: KBD 1 Jul 1808

The plaintiffs granted a lease of land subject to a covenant to give notice of those who worked in the silk mills to be erected and to pay fees for workers employed to cover the town’s responsibilities to inhabitants brought into the town. They now sought payment from the defendants, who were successors in title, and who had not given notice or made payments as required. The defendants argued that they were not liable since it was only a collateral covenant and did not run with the land.
Held: The claim failed: ‘This is a covenant in which the assignee is specifically named; and though it were for a thing not in case at the time, yet being specifically named, it would bind him, if it affected the nature, quality, or value of the thing demised, independently of collateral circumstances; or if it affected the mode of enjoying it. But this covenant does not affect the thing demised, in the one way or the other. It may indeed collaterally affect the lessors as to other lands they may have in possession in the same parish, by increasing the poor’s rate upon them; but it cannot affect them even collaterally in respect of the demised premises during the term. How then can it affect the nature, quality, or value of the thing demised? Can it make any difference to the mills, whether they are worked by persons of one parish or another: or can it affect the value of the thing at the end of the term, independently of collateral circumstances? ‘

Judges:

Lord Ellenborough CJ, Le Blanc J

Citations:

[1808] EWHC KB J66

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Land

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248376

London Borough of Bexley v Maison Maurice Ltd: ChD 15 Dec 2006

The council had taken land by compulsory purchase in order to construct a dual carriageway. It then claimed that it had left undedicated a strip .5 metre wide as a ransom strip to prevent the defendant restoring access to the road.
Held: The result of the council’s decisions was to leave a ransom strip. Whilst the grant of planning permission to create a new access could not create an estoppel, the associated building works might. The company ‘had exchanged one means of access for another effective means of access to the highway; and conducted itself accordingly. In my judgment this belief was encouraged by the Council. ‘ An estoppel had been established against the council, and a declaration was made accordingly.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3192 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 24(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hale v Norfolk County Council CA 17-Nov-2000
A public right away could not be presumed to have been granted by the owner of land adjoining a public highway merely from the erection of fences or hedges on the side of a highway. There is no simple rule that the land was deemed to have been . .
Cited – Rhyl Urban District Council v Rhyl Amusements Ltd 1959
The tenant said that the landlord local authority had accepted his surrender of his lease by granting a new one, but the new lease was void as ultra vires.
Held: Not even the surrender of their old lease on the promise to grant the new one . .
Cited – Western Fish Products Ltd v Penwith District Council and Another CA 22-May-1978
Estoppel Cannot Oust Statutory Discretion
The plaintiff had been refused planning permission for a factory. The refusals were followed by the issue of Enforcement Notices and Stop Notices. The plaintiff said that they had been given re-assurances upon which they had relied.
Held: The . .
Cited – Crabb v Arun District Council CA 23-Jul-1975
The plaintiff was led to believe that he would acquire a right of access to his land. In reliance on that belief he sold off part of his land, leaving the remainder landlocked.
Held: His claim to have raised an equity was upheld. The plaintiff . .
Cited – Taylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd ChD 1981
The fundamental principle that equity is concerned to prevent unconscionable conduct permeates all the elements of the doctrine of estoppel. In the light of the more recent cases, the principle ‘requires a very much broader approach which is . .
Cited – Gillett v Holt and Another CA 23-Mar-2000
Repeated Assurances Created Equitable Estoppel
Repeated assurances, given over years, that the claimant would acquire an interest in property on the death of the person giving the re-assurance, and upon which the claimant relied to his detriment, could found a claim of equitable estoppel. The . .
Cited – Grampian Regional Council v City of Aberdeen District Council 1984
The extinguishment of a private right is not a proper matter for a condition attached to a planning permission, even though a negative condition preventing development until a highway has been stopped up is unobjectionable. . .
Cited – Jennings v Rice, Wilson, Marsh, Norris, Norris, and Reed CA 22-Feb-2002
The claimant asserted a proprietary estoppel against the respondents. He had worked for the deceased over many years, for little payment, and doing more and more for her. Though he still worked full time at first, he came to spend nights at the . .
Cited – Cobbe v Yeomans Row Management Ltd and Others ChD 25-Feb-2005
Principles for Proprietary Estoppel
A developer claimed to have agreed that upon obtaining necessary planning permissions for land belonging to the respondents, he would purchase the land at a price reflecting its new value. The defendant denied that any legally enforceable agreement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Local Government

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.247404

Pankhania and Another v Hackney and Another: ChD 2 Aug 2002

The claimant sought damages alleging misrepresentation of land sold at auction.

Judges:

Rex Tedd QC J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2441 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Thomas Witter v TBP Industries Ltd ChD 15-Jul-1994
An award of damages for misrepresentation required that there had at some time been a right of rescission, not necessarily a continuing right to rescind.
An acknowledgement of non-reliance clause has become a common part of modern commercial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246960

Mear and others v Cambridgeshire County Council: ChD 20 Oct 2006

The claimants sought a declaration that a path over neighbouring land was a public vehicular highway as recorded by the respondents, and not a footpath as asserted by the owners, and that gates over the path infringed the public rights. The council had served notices on the landowners to remove gates.
Held: The status of the land had been conclusively determined since the original hearing as a public bridleway. The court therefore made a declaration accordingly. Any substantial non-temporary interference with a public right of way was a nuisance. The gate was such and an order was made for the removal of one. The remaining two gates should remain only untl a full trial of the particular issues regarding their status.

Judges:

Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2554 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 116, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Seekings v Clarke 1961
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘It is perfectly clear that anything which substantially prevents the public from having free access over the whole of the highway which is not purely temporary in nature is an unlawful obstruction’. . .
Cited – Lake District Special Planning Board, ex parte Bernstein 3-Feb-1982
A diversion of a footpath must be along an entirely new path, and not an existing way. . .
Cited – Regina v Surrey County Council, ex parte Send Parish Council 1979
Under the section, the highway authority has duties when informed by a parish council that a highway has been unlawfully stopped. The highway authority must, ‘unless satisfied that the representations are incorrect’, take proper proceedings . .
Cited – Wolverton Urban District Council v Willis 1962
Where a bridleway designation is not restricted, a gate erected over the line of the way is an unauthorised obstruction, though since every member of the public is entitled to pass and repass along a public road, the rights of each member of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245416

Moto Hospitality Ltd v Highways Agency: LT 28 Jul 2006

LT COMPENSATION – injurious affection – Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 s 10 – preliminary issue – motorway service area – junction alterations affecting trade – whether damage suffered as result of ‘works’ – whether particular damage suffered – held claim for compensation may lie.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LCA – 122 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ocean Leisure Ltd v Westminster City Council LT 31-Dec-2003
LT COMPENSATION – injurious affection – hoardings erected in street during construction works outside shop premises – preliminary issue – whether claim under Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 s 10 valid – held . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Moto Hospitality Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport CA 26-Jul-2007
The company sought damages to its business on a motorway service station when works closed an access road.
Held: The Secretary of State’s appeal succeeded. A claim for compensation under section 10 had not been established, at least in respect . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244522

Horvath, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 21 Jul 2006

The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2004 Regulations whereby the payment under the Single Payment Scheme was reduced because of the existence of a public right of way across the land.
Held: ‘there are cogent arguments for the validity of the crucial paragraphs of the England Regulations. My preliminary view is that the addition of the words ‘and environmental’ were intended to widen the scope of the minimum requirements. The reference in Annex IV to ‘habitats’ is significant. It appears to me that visible rights of way can properly be described as ‘landscape features’. ‘ The question was to be referred to the European Court of Justice.

Judges:

Crane J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1833 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Cross Compliance) (England) Regulations 2004, Rights of Way Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v International Stock Exchange, ex parte Else (1982) Ltd CA 1993
The court gave guidance on the circumstances under which questions should be referred to the European Court of Justice. . .
Cited – Gomez de la Cruz Talegon v Commission ECFI 9-Feb-2000
Europa Officials – Request for reclassification in grade – Objection of inadmissibility – Material new fact – Admissibility. . .
Cited – European Parliament v Council of the European Union 162111 ECJ 25-Feb-1999
ECJ Regulations on the protection of forests against atmospheric pollution and fire – Legal basis – Article 43 of the EC Treaty – Article 130s of the EC Treaty – Parliament’s prerogatives.
Cited – Etablissements Armand Mondiet SA v Armement Islais SARL ECJ 24-Nov-1993
Europa Where the high seas are concerned, the Community has the same rule-making authority in matters within its jurisdiction as that conferred under international law on the State whose flag the vessel is flying . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Land, European

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243368

Sinclair Gardens Investments Kensington Ltd v Eardley Crescent No 75 Ltd: LT 7 Jul 2006

LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – collective enfranchisement – preliminary issue – Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Section 24 – Leasehold Valuation Tribunals (Procedure) (England) Regulations 2003 – Application by nominee purchaser under Section 24(1) to Leasehold Valuation Tribunal – Application identifying price and costs as terms in dispute but omitting to identify any other matters as being in dispute – LVT determining purchase price and costs – subsequently nominee purchaser seeking to restore the application before LVT for determination of further matters in dispute (namely the terms of the proposed conveyance including in particular a proposed indemnity clause) – whether LVT has jurisdiction to allow the restoration of the application for this purpose.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LRA – 77 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243177

Adealon 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 envisaged. No right of way of necessity was implied.

Judges:

Frances Kirkham J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1075 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Titchmarsh v Royston Water Company Limited 1899
The land owner sought a grant of right of way of necessity. His land was blocked on three sides by land of the vendors and on the fourth side by a route which ran in a cutting, which would make connection with the granted land difficult.
Held: . .
Cited – Pomfret v Ricroft 1669
A lease was granted with the use of a pump on land not demised. The lessee complained of the lack of repair of the pump.
Held: The lessee had a right to repair the pump, but the landlord did not have a duty to maintain it. Where land is . .
Cited – Clark v Cogge 1607
A grantee of land shall have the benefit of an implied right of way of the grantor’s land where necessary: ‘the case was, the one sells land and afterwards the vendee, by reason thereof, claims a way over the plaintiff’s land, there being no other . .
Cited – Corporation 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 . .
Cited – Union 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 . .
Cited – In re Webb’s Lease, Sandom v Webb CA 1951
The court considered the acquisition of right of way of necessity. Evershed MR said: ‘If by this language Salter J intended to lay it down that in a case such as this (where it is or may be reasonable for the court to assume that, if the parties had . .
Cited – Pwllbach Colliery Co v Woodman HL 1915
Whether an easement may be created by implication depends on the circumstances under which it is said to have been made. The law implies a grant of such easements as may be necessary to give effect to the common intention of the parties to a grant . .
Cited – Barry 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 . .
Cited – Nickerson v Barraclough CA 13-Dec-1980
The defendant appealed a finding that the plaintiff had a right of way of necessity over his land. When looking to see whether a grant of a right of way of necessity was implied, the court should ascertain the intention of the parties and public . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Sommer 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241685

Chapter Group Plc v London Regional Transport and Another: LT 25 Jan 2006

COMPENSATION – Costs – Sealed offer accepted – S.4(1) of Land Compensation Act 1961 – s.3(5) of Lands Tribunal Act 1949 – Reasonable time for acceptance of sealed offer – Guidance as to form of sealed offer

Citations:

[2006] EWLands CON – 87 – 2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1961 4(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238404

Williamson v Mid-Suffolk District Council: LT 18 Jan 2006

LT COMPENSATION – planning permission – discontinuance order – preliminary issue – airfield – scope and effect of planning permissions granted under s73A of Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – whether conditions would continue to bind adjoining land the subject of an earlier, less restrictive planning permission – issue estoppel – abuse of powers – held conditions would not continue to bind adjoining land – held compensating authority estopped from so contending.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LCA – 73 – 2002

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Newbury District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 1980
Issues arose as to a new planning permission for two existing hangars.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The question of the validity of conditions attached to planning permissions will sometimes be a difficult one. To be valid, a condition must be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238408

Fairhold Ltd v St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council: LT 1 Aug 2005

LT COMPENSATION – compulsory purchase – houses in disrepair – owner of intermediate long leasehold interest not responding to CPO – value – comparable transactions – Land Compensation Act 1961 Part 1 – compensation

Citations:

[2005] UKLands ACQ – 5 – 2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1961

Land, Damages

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229247

Martin and Another v The Coal Authority: LT 6 Jul 2005

LT COMPENSATION – mining subsidence – bungalow suffering successive incidences of damage – claimants rebuilding on adjacent site – whether rebuilding necessary to remedy damage to claimants’ reasonable satisfaction – cost of repairs – Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991 section 6(2)(a) – compensation awarded andpound;53,958

Citations:

[2005] EWLands LCA – 197 – 2000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228971

Hunt and Another v McLaren and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006

Land had been given to a football club under a trust for its exclusive use as such. That land was sold and a new ground acquired and a stadium built, but the land was subject to restrictive covenenats limiting its use to sports, which considerably reduced its value. The trustees sought clarification of their duties.
Held: A gift on trust must have a cestui que trust and must be for the benefit of individuals, unless charitable. It must have a definite object, and there must be someone in whose favour the court can enforce it. In general, in order to be valid, a non-charitable trust must have an ascertainable beneficiary in whose favour performance of the trust may be decreed.

Judges:

Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2386 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Conservative and Unionist Central Office v Burrell (Inspector of Taxes) CA 10-Dec-1981
An unincorporated association is defined as ‘two or more persons bound together for one or more common purposes, not being business purposes, by mutual undertakings each having mutual duties and obligations, in an organisation which has rules which . .
Cited – Saunders v Vautier 7-May-1841
A direction in a will stated that the income from certain shares was to be accumulated and invested until the beneficiary attained the age of 25. On attaining his majority at 21 years, the beneficiary sought termination of the trust, and transfer of . .
Cited – Morice v Bishop of Durham HL 1805
The court was asked whether a gift of residue to be applied ‘to such objects of benevolence and liberality as the Bishop of Durham in his own discretion shall most approve of’ was valid as being confined to purposes that were charitable.
Held: . .
Cited – Neville Estates Ltd v Madden ChD 1962
A charitable trust was created for the benefit of the members of Catford Synagogue.
Held: The court considered three categories of valid non-charitable purpose gifts: (1) an absolute gift to members of an association at the date of the gift, . .
Cited – Re Nottage CA 12-Jul-1895
A testator bequeathed a fund in trust to provide annually for ever a cup to be given to the most successful yacht of the season, stating that his object in giving the cup was to encourage the sport of yacht-racing.
Held: (affirming the . .
Cited – Elvridge v Coulson ChD 15-Jul-2003
An unregistered friendly society was dissolved. The governing instrument provided that the votes should be counted according to value, and that a vote of five sixths of such members by value were need to dissolve the company. Members claimed to be . .
Cited – Re GKN Bolts and Nuts Ltd etc Works Sports and Social Club ChD 1982
There was a sports and social club associated with GKN, whose members were all employees of GKN. The main issue in the case was whether the club had ceased to exist. But one subsidiary issue was whether a meeting had been validly convened. The club . .
Cited – Re Lead Co.’s Workmen’s Fund Society 1904
. .
Cited – Leahy v Attorney-General of New South Wales PC 20-Apr-1959
leahy_agnswPC1959-4
A gift to an unincorporated association simpliciter, i.e. where neither the circumstances of the gift nor the directions given nor the object expressed impose on the donee the character of a trustee, is nothing else than a gift to its members at the . .
Cited – Re Endacott CA 12-Oct-1959
The will had left the residue to a parish council for the purpose of providing some useful memorial to myself, subject to the proviso that if my wife outlives me they must during the lifetime of my wife pay to my wife the interest which may accrue . .
Cited – Neville Estates Ltd v Madden ChD 1962
A charitable trust was created for the benefit of the members of Catford Synagogue.
Held: The court considered three categories of valid non-charitable purpose gifts: (1) an absolute gift to members of an association at the date of the gift, . .
Cited – In re Denley’s Trust Deed ChD 1969
The trustees of land in Gloucestershire were to maintain the land as a sports ground for the benefit of the employees of a company and also for ‘such other person or persons (if any) as the trustees may allow to use the same . . .’ The Deed . .
Cited – Whishaw v Stephens (on appeal from In re Gulbenkian’s Settlement) (No 1) HL 31-Oct-1968
Parties disputed the effect of clauses describing the beneficiaries of a trust.
Held: The clause did not make sense as it stood. In a fixed non-charitable trust (as opposed to a discretionary trust) the court must be able to draw up a list of . .
Cited – Re Grant’s Will Trusts ChD 1980
The deceased left property to the Labour Party property committee.
Held: A trust created by making a gift to the members of an unincorporated assoication as at the date of the gift can be wound up only if under the rules, the members could, at . .
Cited – McPhail v Doulton (on appeal from In re Baden’s Deed Trusts) HL 6-May-1970
The settlor asked whether the test for validity, in point of certainty of objects, is the same for trusts and powers, or whether the test for trusts is more demanding.
Held: The test is the same. The context was a provision, held to be a . .
Cited – In re Bucks Constabulary Widows and Orphans Fund Friendly Society (No 2) 1979
In the absence of any contractual obligation otherwise, the funds of a mutual society must be distributed equally on a dissolution. . .
Cited – Re Recher’s Will Trusts ChD 1972
The deceased gave a share of the residue, to ‘The Anti-Vivisection Society, 76 Victoria Street, London S.W.1.’ She died in 1962 and her husband died in 1968. Until the end of 1956 a non-charitable unincorporated society, known as the ‘London and . .
Cited – Re Lipinski’s Will Trusts ChD 1976
Harry Lipinski bequeathed his residuary estate on trust as to half for the Hull Judeans (Maccabi) Association to be used solely to construct and improve the new buildings for the association. The executors sought a determination whether the bequest . .
Cited – Sharab v Salfiti CA 12-Dec-1996
No amendment was to be allowed to a claim introducing an allegation of a foreign criminal offence. The claim in contract failed for insufficient certainty or on some other ground, but a claim nonetheless succeeded as a quantum meruit. . .
Cited – Way v Latilla HL 1937
Mr Way (W), the plaintiff, was employed by Ariston, which had mining operations in Africa, as a consulting engineer and manager. He met the respondent (L) in England. He was asked to seek options to acquire concessions the respondent might acquire. . .
Cited – Becerra v Close Brothers ComC 25-Jun-1999
ComC Claim for fee for introducing successful bidder at a controlled auction – no express contract – no implied contract based on City practice – claim for quantum meruit failed because no express or implied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Land

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.245176

Cdc2020 Plc v Ferreira: CA 5 May 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 611

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Harris v Flower CA 1904
The servient land-owner alleged an excessive user by which it was attempted to impose an additional burden on the servient tenement in the use of a right of way for obtaining access to a factory erected partly on the land to which the right of way . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226146

Skupinski, Re Law of Property Act 1925: LT 30 Nov 2004

A covenant prevented new building other than for a garage. The owner proposed a three-car garage extension, but with a play-room above, for the applicant’s own use. The relevant property of the objector was not her own house, but consisted of a driveway, and a plot of land on which she hoped to be allowed to build a house. The development had proceeded without obtaining a modification. High Court proceedings for breach of the covenant were adjourned, at the appeal stage, to allow an application to the tribunal under section 84. The principle of modification was agreed, so that the only issue was compensation. The main issues were, first, the impact of the development on the objector’s property, and, secondly, whether she was entitled to compensation assessed, as she claimed, on the negotiated share basis.
Held: The President described the impact on her plot as ‘minimal’, and concluded that there should be no compensation.

Citations:

[2004] EWLands LP – 34 – 2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stokes v Cambridge Corporation LT 1961
The tribunal considered case concerned 5.1 ha of land with an assumption of planning permission for industrial development under Planning legislation. There was only one possible access over adjoining land in different ownership.
Held: When . .

Cited by:

Cited – Winter and Another v Traditional and Contemporary Contracts Ltd CA 7-Nov-2007
The land-owners applied for a variation of a restrictive covenant to allow them to put a second house on their plot. They had bought out the right of the original builder, but a neighbour also had the benefit of the covenant. They now appealed the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225825

Wealden Land Ltd v Naylor-Perrott and others: LT 28 Jan 2004

LT Restrictive Covenants – Entitlement to benefit – Building Scheme – No evidence of notice of common understanding — Exclusion of benefit of covenant in later conveyances – Effect on subsequent purchasers – Law of Property Act 1925 S.78 – Costs on Preliminary issue.

Citations:

[2004] EWLands LP – 8 – 2003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225789

Hamden Homes Ltd, Re: LT 12 Dec 2001

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – restriction to one dwelling house per plot – application to amend this limitation to permit erection on one plot of detached and two semi-detached houses, possibly as part of a larger development – not all proposed development site owned by applicant – whether proposed use reasonable – whether restriction obsolete – whether injury to objectors – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, s84(1)(a)(aa)(c)

Citations:

[2001] EWLands LP – 38 – 1999

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225692

Faraday v Carmarthenshire County Council: LT 24 Jul 2003

LT COMPULSORY PURCHASE – compensation – estate agent’s office and general offices above – valuation of freehold – whether direct to freehold value or by capitalising rental value – whether disturbance compensation based on assumed relocation of business or lengthy profit losses followed by total extinguishment of business – whether claimant took reasonable steps to mitigate loss – whether adjustments should be made to accounts of business conducted in freehold premises to reflect property’s rental value when assessing loss of profits incurred prior to acquisition and loss on extinguishment of goodwill – assessment of interest on pre-valuation date losses – compensation of andpound;354,111 awarded, exclusive of certain interest to be agreed or determined.

Citations:

[2003] EWLands ACQ/84/1997

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Land Tribunal Act 1949

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225749

Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport: LT 4 Dec 2002

COMPENSATION – Compulsory acquisition of a development of flats and bungalows, constructed as sheltered accommodation for the elderly – open market value – whether units would have been sold individually or to a single purchaser – assessment of holding costs – interim decision – compensation awarded pounds 2,060,000

Citations:

[2002] EWLands ACQ – 147 – 2000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225722

Re Marcello Developments Ltd: LT 30 Mar 2001

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – restrictions in 7 conveyances including restrictions of frontage, building line and use – site developed with flats in breach of restriction – discharge and modification sought to enable redevelopment with flats and houses – effect of High Court declaration on enforceability – grounds (a), (aa), (b) and (c) – discharge and modification – sums of pounds 2,500 to be paid to owners of each of 8 houses with benefit of restrictions

Citations:

[2001] EWLands LP – 31 – 2000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225643

Halil 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 – multiplier – Land Compensation Act 1961 s1 – Award: andpound;73,176.

Citations:

[2001] EWLands ACQ – 105 – 1999

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Perezic v Bristol Corporation 1955
In calculating compensation on a compulsory purchase, there should be no deduction from notional profit to reflect the ‘wages’ of the proprietor of a business operated by a sole trader. . .
Cited – Klein v London Underground 1996
On the compulsory purchase of a hairdresser’s business, the tribunal adopted a three years’ purchase basis. . .
Cited – Sceneout Ltd v Central Manchester District Council 1995
The tribunal calculated compensation in a total extinguishment by reference to the value to the owner. In this case a multiplier of just under two was used. . .
Cited – Zarraga v Newcastle upon Tyne Corporation 1968
‘in assessing the business profits, no deduction should be made in respect of ‘wages’ of the claimant’s wife, notwithstanding a figure in respect thereof had been allowed for income tax purposes, since the wife could not fairly be classed as a ‘paid . .
Cited – Afzal v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council 1980
. .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Appleby v Ireland 1978
‘the multiplier that has come to be regarded as fair and reasonable as between a dispossessed trader and an acquiring authority is 3YP of ascertained net profit, assuming the business to have been trading at a steady level of profitability and from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225639