header-logo header-logo

03 July 2009 / Sue Highmore
Issue: 7376 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Righting a wrong

Despite careful drafting, easements can be a ripe source of dispute, says Sue Highmore

In Carter v Cole [2009] EWCA Civ 410, [2009] All ER (D) 188 (May) the parties twice ended up in the Court of Appeal to resolve conflicts over the wording of a right of way.

The Carters sold off most of their land to the Coles in 2000, retaining a small plot that was used (by a tenant) as a water bottling plant. A right of way was reserved over the land being sold to provide an access route between the retained land and the highway. The temporary planning consent (for the bottling plant) in force at the time of the sale required adequate visibility splays to be preserved at the junction with the main road, on which only low level vegetation was permitted. The visibility splay land was transferred to the Coles but (the first flaw in the drafting) no restrictive covenant was imposed on them in relation to the planting scheme on that land. The transfer was made

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime specialist joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
Could an online LLM in Commercial and Technology Law expand your career options?
The controversial Courts and Tribunals Bill has passed its second reading by 304 votes to 203, despite concerted opposition from the legal profession
The presumption of parental involvement is to be abolished, the Lord Chancellor David Lammy has confirmed
A highly experienced chartered legal executive has been prevented from representing her client in financial remedies proceedings, in a case that highlights the continued fallout from Mazur
Plans to commandeer 50%-75% of the interest on lawyers’ client accounts to fund the justice system overlook the cost and administrative burden of this on small and medium law firms, CILEX has warned
back-to-top-scroll