Land Law Easements And Profits

Front 1

Re Ellenborough Park

Back 1

the four requirements of easements

Front 2

1)Ladbroke Retail parks

Back 2

there must be a dominant and servient land

Front 3

2)Hill v Tupper

Back 3

the right must accomodate the dominant tenement

Front 4

3)Roe v Siddons

Back 4

must be diversity of ownership/occupation of S&D land

Front 5

4)Chaffe

Back 5

right must lie in grant

Front 6

Bailey

Back 6

s and d land must be sufficiently proximate

Front 7

Dyce

Back 7

list of easements can be expanded upon

Front 8

Phipps

Back 8

courts are reluctant to acknowledge new negative easements

Front 9

Regis

Back 9

servient owner should not be obliged to spend money

Front 10

Jones

Back 10

servient owner is under no obligation to maintain and repair

Front 11

Copeland

Back 11

an easement cannot exist where it gives the dominant owner exclusive use of the servient land

Front 12

Miller

Back 12

nature of the right is influential-toilet had to be exclusive possession but only for a short time

Front 13

Hair

Back 13

1 parking space out of 4 is an easement

Front 14

Batchelor

Back 14

exclusive weekday use of a parking space could not be an easement

Front 15

Green v Ashco

Back 15

the need to constantly seek permission to use the right precludes it from being an easement

Front 16

Express acquisition of an easement

Back 16

grant
reservation

Front 17

Implied grant

Back 17

-out of necessity
-out of common intention
-s62
-Wheeldon v Burrows Rule

Front 18

Pryce

Back 18

necessity means it must be essential to the use of the land

Front 19

Manjang

Back 19

an alternative less convenient access route may preclude a right of way arising through necessity

Front 20

Adealon

Back 20

it may depend upon how realistic the alternative is

Front 21

Nickerson

Back 21

implied grant is subject to contrary intention

Front 22

Wong v Beaumont Property trust

Back 22

easement can be implied through common intention, where it is essential for a specific use of the land

Front 23

s62 LPA 1925

Back 23

passes all existing rights to successor in title

Front 24

Macadam

Back 24

s62-a t's revocable licence to store coal in a coal shed converted upon granting of a new lease into a legal easement

Front 25

s62 LPA criteria

Back 25

-there must be a conveyance
-right must exist at the date of the conveyance-Penn
-there must be diversity of occupation prior to conveyance-Sovmots

Front 26

Payne

Back 26

diversity of occupation is not required for an easement of light

Front 27

P&S Platt

Back 27

diversity was necessary where the right in question was continuous and apparent

Front 28

Wheeldon v Burrows

Back 28

-elevates quasi easements into full easements

Front 29

Kent

Back 29

for WvB there must be common ownership and occupation prior to the conveyance

Front 30

Hansford

Back 30

the right must be continuous and apparent, eg worn tarmac road across a field

Front 31

Wheeler

Back 31

-must be more than a mere convenience
-right must be necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of the dominant land

Front 32

Prescription

Back 32

-common law
-lost modern grant
-prescription act 1932

Front 33

Prescription 3 conditions

Back 33

-user must be as of right, nec vi, nec clam, nec precario-Mills
-user must be continuous, 3 times in 20 years was insufficient-Hollins
-user must be by/on behalf of a fee simple owner against another

Front 34

Common law

Back 34

user must show there has been 20 years continuous use. can be rebutted by showing it wasnt used at any time since 1189

Front 35

Lost modern grant

Back 35

20 years of continuous use, courts presume it was done by deed

Front 36

Tehidy

Back 36

cant rebut LMG presumption with evidence that a grant was never made

Front 37

Oakley

Back 37

it can only be rebutted by evidence that a grant was legally impossible

Front 38

Prescription act 1832

Back 38

-not applicable to rights of light
-must establish either 20 or 40 years uninterrupted use

Front 39

20 years use

Back 39

will be defeated by oral or written consent

Front 40

40 years use

Back 40

will only be defeated by written consent

Front 41

Flight v Thomas

Back 41

an interruption of less than a year will not defeat a claim

Front 42

right to light

Back 42

20 yrs use will result in an absolute and indefeasible easement being acquired unless it is by written consent-s3

Front 43

Legal Easements

Back 43

-created by competent grantor
-created by deed s52 LPA
-equivalent in duration to a legal estate in land-s1(2)(a) LPA
-expressly acquired by grant or reservation
-reg land-reg in accordance w s27(2)(a) LRA 2002

Front 44

Equitable easements

Back 44

-created merely in compliance with s53(1)(a) LPA\
-created by an equitable estate owner
-failue of legal formalities, but still an enforceable contract-Walsh v Lonsdale

Front 45

Enforcement of easements-Registered land-Legal

Back 45

-expressly acquired-must be registered to be automatically binding
-impliedly acquired-overriding interest under sch3 para 2, must be actually known to the purchase, obvious on reasonably careful inspection and exercised w/n 1 year prior to disposition

Front 46

Enforcement of easements-Registered land-equitable

Back 46

express or implied-if entered as a notice it will be binding s32 LRA 2002
-if not entered as a notice, will not bind a purchaser for value-s29 LRA
-will not be an overriding interest

Front 47

Enforcement of easements-Unregistered land-legal

Back 47

binds the world

Front 48

Enforcement of easements-Unregistered land-equitable

Back 48

-class d3 land charge-will be binding s198 LPA
-if not registered, will not bind a purchaser of a legal estate, s4(6)LCA

Front 49

s62 LPA

Back 49

benefit of an easement will auto pass to the successor in title

Front 50

Termination of easements

Back 50

-merger of S&D land
-release-express, implied or statute
-change of character-Attwood-change of use if D land which leads to substantial increase in the burden on the S Land-easement may be terminated