|
Right of way - interpretation |
|
|
The defendant converted his building into a pub, with the rear yard being a beer garden. He claimed the benefit of a right of way through a passage on his neighbour’s land but the neighbour argued that the right of way did not extend to such an extensive use.
The CA agreed. The case had to be decided by looking at the wording of the 1921 grant, which referred to it as being ‘as used by [the then owner’s tenant]’. In the court’s view that meant the right of way could only be used for the uses for which it was granted in 1921. That was most likely to be for trade purposes only, and would not have extended to customers. Needless to say, cases of this sort always depend on their own facts. But, it is an example of the courts refusing to permit a wider use than was intended to be authorised at the date of the grant of the right.
|
|
April 2009 |
