Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
29 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
First requirement |
There must be a dominant tenement and servient tenement |
|
|
Hawkins v Rutter |
The land which is benefitting from the easement is the dominant tenement |
|
|
Definition of easement |
The right to use/enjoy or the right (indirectly) to restrict, the use or enjoyment of land belonging to someone else |
|
|
Second requirement |
The easement must be closely connected to the ordinary enjoyment of the dominant land i.e must establish the ordinary enjoyment/use of the land and then analyse if the easement in question serves this ordinary enjoyment |
|
|
Moody v Steggles |
There must be a sufficient connection with the ordinary enjoyment of the land |
|
|
Hill v Tupper |
If the right is not connected to the land it cannot be an easement |
|
|
Third requirement |
The dominant tenement and servient tenement must be in close proximity |
|
|
Pugh v Savage |
If the DT and ST are adjacent this will be sufficiently proximate |
|
|
Fourth requirement |
There must be no common ownership or possession of the dominant tenement and servient tenement |
|
|
Roe v Siddons |
No common ownership |
|
|
Sixth requirement |
The right must be sufficiently precise/definite |
|
|
Bland v Mosely |
It must be possible to sufficiently identify the right |
|
|
Seventh requirement |
The right must be judicially recognised as an easement or must be sufficiently analogous to a judicially-recognised easement |
|
|
Wright v Macadam |
The right to store is a judicially recognised easement |
|
|
London v Blenheim |
The right to park is a judicially recognised easement |
|
|
Phipps v Pears |
New positives easements may be allowed by the courts but no new negative easements will be recognised |
|
|
Eighth requirement |
No expenditure by the servient owner |
|
|
William Old v Arya |
If the servient owner must spend money to exercise the right it is not an easement |
|
|
Ninth requirement |
The right must not ‘oust’ the servient owner |
|
|
Batchelor v Marlown |
One test for oust - is the servient owner left with reasonable use of the servient tenement |
|
|
Moncrieff v Jameson |
One of the tests for ‘oust’ - does the servient owner still retain possession and control of the servient tenement? If yes then no exclusive possession and so easement may exist |
|
|
Tenth requirement |
If the right is exercisable by permission only, it cannot be an easement |
|
|
Copeland v Greenhalf |
Ratio - A right which ousts the servient owner cannot be an be an easement |
|
|
Green v Ascho Horticulturist |
Right only exercisable by permission cannot be an easement |
|
|
Bailey v Stephens |
Dt and st must be sufficiently proximate |
|
|
Hunter v Canary Wharf |
Related to sixth requirement that the right must be sufficiently precise |
|
|
Fifth requirement |
There must be a capable grantor and grantee i.e both must have estates in land |
|
|
Metro Railway v Fowler |
Grantor and grantee must have estates in the land |
|
|
Wills v Tupper |
A right not linked to the land cannot be an easement |
