skip navigation

Latest News

  Is a Caravan a Home? 
  Bankruptcy and Your Home  
  Trees Do Not a Forest Make 
  Covenant Prohibits Lawful Use  
  Home Information Packs - New Changes  
  Lenders get Tough as Negative Equity Rises 
  Clarity Lacking - Common Sense Prevails 
  Holiday Bungalow is not a Dwelling  
  Estate Agents - Compulsory Redress Scheme Registration  
  Right to Buy Not Overriding Factor  
More...

Right of Way - Intention Doesn't Count


 

If you are buying or selling property, having an 'understanding' of what covenants are meant to mean is no substitute for making sure the covenant is correctly worded  - as a recent case illustrates.

The case concerned a property was conveyed with a right of way over a pathway over the adjacent property such that access could be obtained to the road from the rear of the property. In such circumstances, where the ability to use someone else’s land in some way (called an easement in legal parlance) is granted, it is usual for its terms to state any restrictions which may apply to its use.

The right of way stated that the occupiers of the property had the right of use of the pathway at all times for the purpose of access to or egress from the property for ‘all reasonable use necessary for the proper enjoyment of the property’. Unfortunately for their neighbour, this involved access early in the morning and late at night by visitors. The neighbours took the view that this use was more than was needed ‘for the proper enjoyment of the property’ and sought a ruling to restrict the use of the path.

The judge agreed, ruling that the original purpose of the right of way was to allow access to the rear of the property when access to the front was impracticable. In reaching this decision, he considered two documents which purported to come from the local council (which had sold both properties under the ‘right to buy’ legislation). These stated that the right of way was restricted in various ways. One of these documents, however, was written after the properties had been sold.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal, the decision was reversed. The understanding of the parties at the time of the grant of the right of way was not in point, what mattered was the law which applied. The legal documentation clearly stated that the grant of the right of way applied at all times for the reasonable use of the property. If there had been the intention to limit the right, it should have been contained in the deeds.

 

 
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
 
 

Steed & Steed Solicitors, 76-82 & 86 Coggeshall Road, Braintree, Essex, CM7 9BY 01376 552828
6, Gainsborough Street, Sudbury, Suffolk CO10 2ET 01787 373387
© Steed & Steed Solicitors. All rights reserved.

Legal Disclaimer

Steed & Steed Solicitors is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)
[smaller] Change text size [larger]