Manchester Airport Plc v Dutton
297 words (1 pages) Case Summary
15th Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team
Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law
Manchester Airport Plc v Dutton  QB 133
A contractual licensee has a right to possession.
The claimants, Manchester Airport, wished to construct a second runway at the airport. The defendants, a group of environmental protestors, objected to the works and entered neighbouring land owned by the National Trust. They set up camp without a licence or consent in order to obstruct the works. Subsequently, the National Trust granted the Airport a licence to enter the land and fell trees there. The Airport then applied for and obtained an order for possession of the land pursuant to the Rules of the Supreme Court Ord. 113. The defendants appealed against the grant of the order and the dispute went to the Court of Appeal.
The argument against the grant of the order was that it would amount to ejectment. A licence is a mere personal right, whereas a lease is a proprietary interest in land. A tenant under a lease may sue in trespass. However, a licensee has fewer rights. The defendants argued that the grant of an order for possession was only available to someone with a title or an estate in land. As a mere licensee, the Airport lacked this.
The appeal was dismissed and the order was upheld. Laws LJ stated that just because ejectment was limited to parties with a title or interest to land this did not prevent them granting possession to a mere licensee, if that was necessary in order to give effect to the licensee’s rights under his contract with the licensor. The court held that it made no difference whether the Airport had actually occupied the land before the protestors.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
Related ContentJurisdictions / Tags
Content relating to: "UK Law"
UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.
Lavarack v Woods of Colchester
Lavarack was employed by Woods of Colchester (WOC). Under the employment contract, he was to earn £4,000 per year and such bonuses as the directors......
London County Council v Cattermoles
A man was employed as a garage as a general garage hand, during which he would assist in moving cars out of the way of other cars......