Land- Easements- Creation- 2A: Necessity

Front 1

DEF 'implied by necessity'

(G and R)

Back 1

The land would be useless without the E in its favour

Front 2

Four factors

Back 2

1) As usual, the right must be capable of being an E

2) Implication can be prevented by express words, but ct's reluctant to find this - 'Hillman v Rogers'

3) Is a STRICT test of necessity; must spell out reasons
- 'Manjang v Drammeh': must be necessary for any use of the land at all
- 'Re MRA Engineering': no implied E by necessity for vehicular ROW, as access by foot

4) There are few necessity cases as there is usually another ground to justify an E

Front 3

a) Grant

Back 3

E.g. ROW or light

'Wong v Beaumont': implied grant of an E of ventilation by necessity so could use the premises as a restaurant

BUT: really common intention?

Front 4

b) Reservation

Back 4

Rare; only an idiot seller wouldn't notice they were making their land unusable

'Sweet v Sommer': implied reservation of an E by necessity as only other access to the property would require destruction of a physical barrier