Easements

Question 0

Phipps v Pears

Answer 0

court refused to recognise as an easement the right for a wall of a detached house to enjoy protection from the weather from the wall of an adjoining house

Question 1

Hunter v Canary Wharf

Answer 1

Restrictive covenants should be limited and precise. They represent an anomaly in the law becaus ethey restrict the owners’ freedom

Question 2

Colls v Home

Answer 2

Recognised a right to light can constitute a valid negative easement. However, such a right must be through a specific aperture, eg a window, and cannot be a general right to light

Question 3

Bachelor v Marlow

Answer 3

The right to park would not be an easement if the affect of it was to leave the servient owner without any reasonable use of his land

Question 4

Wheeldon v Burrows

Answer 4

A buyer on a sale of part will acquire an implied easement over the retained land of a seller where no express provision has been made, if the right was (a) continuous (b) apparent (c) necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of the land and (d) being used as a quasi easement by the seller for the benefit of the part of the land being sold at the time of the sale of part

Question 5

Ward v Kirkland

Answer 5

the words continuous and apparent require some feature to be present on the servient tenement which would be apparent on an inspection

Question 6

Re Ellenborough Park

Answer 6

Essential characteristics of an easement: (1) dominant and servient tenement (2) it accomodates the dominant tenement (3) the dom and serv tenements must not be occupied by the same person (4) a right over land cannot amount to an easement unless it is capable of forming the sibject matter of a grant

Question 7

Allen v Greenwood

Answer 7

Recognises right to light as easement

Question 8

Wright v Macadam

Answer 8

Permission to share coal shed was found to be capable of existing as an easement