Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PROPERTY > EASEMENTS > Flashcards

EASEMENTS Flashcards

1
Q

What is an easement?

A

The right to do something on a plot of land belonging to another
Dominant tenement over a servient tenement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Classic example of an easement

A

Right of way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are the two requirements of an easement?

A

1) Satisfys the 4 requirements of re ELLENBOROUGH PARK

2) Was created correctly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the 4 requirements of Re ELLENBOROUGH PARK

A
  • Dom and serv tenements must be identifiable
  • Must accommodate the dom tenement
  • Diversity of ownership of the estates
  • Must be capable of being subject matter of a grant
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Acronym for remembering ELLENBOROUGH PARK

A

D -Dom and serv tenements indentifable
A - Accommodates dom tenement
D - Diversity of ownership
S - Subject matter of deed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Case for dom and serv tenements clearly identifiable

A

LONDON AND BLENHEIM ESTATES v LADBROKE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Cases for no identifiable dominant land = no easement

A

HAWKINS v RUTTER - no easement

MOODIE v STEGGLES - easement allowed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

HAWKINS v RUTTER

A
  • Tried to claim an easement for his barge and the right to moor it along the canal
  • Barge not real property (land) so could not be a dominant tenement
  • No dominant tenement = no easement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Case stating ST must serve DT, benefiting the land?

A

HILL V TUPPER

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

HILL v TUPPER

A
  • Claimed a right to run hired boats on a canal
  • When a competitor did he same, claim made that he had an easement over the canal so could exclude the competitor
  • He had a mere personal contractual right over the canal, as if it doesn’t benefit the land = no easement, no property right
  • Could only sue for breach of contract
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

MOODIE v STEGGLES

A
  • Sign for a pub on the main road, pub itself down a side alley
  • Landowner on main road wanted to remove the sign
  • Sign held to benefit the land (pointed to the pub) and was integral to use of land as a pub
  • DT was the pub, ST the rod where the sign was
    = easement so could not be removed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Why are courts generally reluctant to grant property right?

A

They are long lasting and powerful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Case for there being diversity of ownership of tenements?

A

ROE v SIDDONS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

ROE v SIDDONS

A

Impossible to have an easement over your own land

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Why is subject matter of an easement important?

A

-> Must be capable of being subject matter of a grant, so it can be put in a lease

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are certain established easements?

A

1) Clearly defined right of way (clear as to allow co-existence of rights of both tenants)
2) Drainage
3) Something capable of being a property right

17
Q

Is a view an easement?

A

NO

-> Too imprecise

18
Q

Case for right to a view not being an easement

A

Re ALDREDS

19
Q

Re ALDREDS

A

Cannot have easement that is the right to a view, it is too imprecise

20
Q

Case that states in order to be an easement it must be capable of being a property right?

A

HUNTER v CANARY WARF

21
Q

Why can’t an easement amount to exclusive possession?

A
  • > It is only the co-existence of separate property rights

- > Exclusive possession = lease

22
Q

BATCHELOR v MARLOW

no easement

A
  • Claim of easement to use 6 parking spaces in a tiny lot, mon-fri, 8.30am-6pm
  • Having a right at specific times = exclusive possession, particularly as so extensive
  • If ST loses reasonable enjoyment of their land then cannot be an easement
23
Q

MILLER v EMCER

easement

A
  • Had right to use toilet in neighbours garden, neighbour argued = exclusive possession as they couldn’t use it while he was in it
  • Was not constantly in the toilet, only while using it = exclusive use NOT exclusive possesion
  • Both were entitled to exclusive use, balance
24
Q

WRIGHT v MACADAM

easement

A
  • In relation to storage space
  • Given permission to use coal storage area, owner argued that exclusive possession of the coal shed taken
  • There were plenty of other areas to safely store coal on the ST, so easement was allowed
  • Shows importance of considering entire area of both tenements to achieve a balance of rights
25
Q

MONCREIF v JAMESON (Scottish case)

easement

A
  • Also to do with storage

- Idea of a test centred on possession and control of an area, like MARLOW

26
Q

What is meant by an easement being a negative burden?

A

It doesn’t involve expenditure

27
Q

Case that states easement is negative burden

A

REGIS PROPERTY v REDMAN

28
Q

What was the argument in CROW v WOOD

A
  • Possibility of allowing expenditure towards upkeep of a swimming pool so they could give an easement for it’s use
  • Court held no, ANY expenditure = no easement
29
Q

REGIS PROPERTY v REDMAN
confirmed in
CROW v WOOD

A

Easement’s do not involve expenditure

30
Q

Case for easement being a right, not a permission

A

GREEN v ASCHO

31
Q

GREEN v ASCHO

A
  • Gate to use right of way across ST was locked, DT had to ask for it to be opened
  • Having to ask for permission is not using an easement as a right, which it is
32
Q

According to LPA 1925, how is an express easement created?

A
  • > Giving express permission
  • > s52 states it must be by deed
  • > s1(2)(a) states it must amount to an estate in land, i.e. be for a fixed term or forever
33
Q

s52 LPA 1925

A

For an express easement to be legally valid it must be made by deed

34
Q

s1(2)(a) LPA 1925

A

Easements must amount to an estate in land

  • > Fixed term OR
  • > Lasts forever
35
Q

Why has the law on valid legal easements changed since 2002?

A

s27 of the LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002

  • Easement must be registered in it’s own right
  • Is separate on the register
36
Q

Section of the LRA 2002 stating easements must be registered in their own right

A

s27

PROPERTY (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions