Land Law Case. In advising Mary, it must be noted what rights she has over the adjacent land brought by George.

Authors Avatar by calum_82 (student)


In advising Mary, it must be noted what rights she has over the adjacent land brought by George. George’s stance that he will do anything with his land will be looked into and whether Mary can do anything about the proposed development.

The problem, Is the land capable of being used in this way and how it can be created. An easement is effectively a right which is enjoyed in one's land by another.

"The common law recognised a limited number of rights which one landowner could acquire over the land of another; and these rights were called easements and profits."

Mary will have an interest in the easement  ‘right of light’. This easement however is well-defined and in order for a claim to be proficient of becoming an easement, it has characteristics to satisfy that are listed in the case of ‘Re Ellenborough Park’ (1956). These characteristics are in this manner; there have to firstly be a servient and dominant tenement, secondly that right has to accommodate a dominant tenement, this means that it is essential that it is associated with its enjoyment as well as for its benefit, as shown in the case of ‘Hill v Tupper’ (1863). This rule along with the case of ‘Ackroyd v Smith’ (1850) has triggered debate as this showed that the grouping of easements is limited to only renowned types, thirdly the servient and dominant tenements have to be owned by different parties, in this situation George's land is the servient tenement, whilst Marys building and land are the dominant tenement since it has enjoyment of the benefit and that the two owners gratify the condition that the tenements are owned by different parties and finally the right has to be capable of forming of a grant.

This will include numerous ideas which aimto control the range of possible easements. For example, in order for an easement to exist, the right has to be of clear description as well as having a specific definition in the meaning and does not need to be  used for  purposes of enjoyment only. In the case of ‘Re Aldred’ (1610) it said that the right to having a good view did not represent an easement. This suggests that the acquirement of easements would  not be found to be unclear as this would warrant against the creation of miscellaneous definitions. It can however be argued that the final condition in the ‘Re Ellenborough Park’ case will allow for some judicial discretion as well as flexibility within the system. In the case of ‘Re Ellenborough Park’ the rules merely acted as a guide, however a judge may frequently decide to recognise the easement that is centred onto the property and its needs, its circumstances regarding the case and the behaviour of the parties. Therefore the law is unclear as it will become to some extent complex to emphasise when a new right will apply in becoming an easement.

An easement could be recognised in three ways which could be created; either by way of an implied or reserved grant by operation of statute, express or reserved grant or by the operation of prescription.

An easement becomes considered to become legal once it is expressed or implied within a deed and statute. It can be argued that Mary has had the right of light for many years, this is implied.

An easement can also come by an implied grant through a reason of necessity by a common intention of the parties, under the rule in ‘Wheeldon v Burrows’ (1897) and Under Section 62 of the LPA 1925. These methods of obtaining easements with an implied grant can often  overlap, because as easements are created by implication they are then more complicated to define, because this will depend wholly upon the circumstances and facts of each exclusive case as to whether or not that an easement by implication can be present.

With terms of by way of necessity then properties can  convey to contain an implied easement linked on top of it.

Join now!

Easements by implication are more difficult to define. It will depend on the facts and circumstances to each exclusive case whether or not an easement by implication will exist.. The recognised rule that is found in the case of ‘Wheeldon v Burrows’ (1897) was that upon the grant of the land that all easements will be attained by the grantee and are apparent and continuous and at the time of the grant they have been used for the benefit of the land itself by the grantor. If the rule in the case of ‘Wheeldon v Burrows’ (1897)is followed  then easements ...

This is a preview of the whole essay