This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Published: Fri, 02 Feb 2018
Use of land of another person
Easements; a right to use or restrict the use of the land of another person in a particular matter, but not so as to allow the owner of the easement to take anything except water from the land over which easement is exercised. In Re Ellen borough park the characteristics of an easement were laid down, these were (1) there must be a dominant and servient tenement (2) an easement must accommodate the dominant tenement and it would do so if it made the dominant tenement a better and more convenient property(e.g.) if it increased the value of the property. Under the accommodation here must also be sufficient nexus between the enjoyment of the easement and the dominant tenement in order words proximate. It must also be shown that the easement accommodates the land as opposed to the person as an easement is more than a mere personal right as in hill v tupper (3) the dominant and servient owners must be different persons(4) the right claimed must be capable of forming the subject matter of a grant.
Easements can be acquired through; (1) express grant – this arises in three categories of case by the means of express words: this constitute the most common form of grant of easement and is usually made by the use of express words in the conveyance of the legal estate of the dominant tenement and provided it is granted for a period of time equivalent to a freehold or leasehold estate, and the conveyance itself complies with the formal requirement and this must be supported by an act of paart performance McManus v Cooke 1887. Estopel ; this method of acquisition covers a situation where no formal grant of an easement is made but an easement arises in consequences of the conduct of the parties as in crabb v arun distrct council. Implied easement; where an easement is not expressly granted or reserved it may still be acquired impliedly. There are three situations in which the law is prepared to imply an easement in favour of the grantee against the grantor; (a) necessity; it means that u have to show that without the easmenet your land canot be used at all as in MRA engineering v Trimster. (b) common intention ; this happens when it is the common intention of the parties at the time of the conveyance that an easement should be granted as in wrong v beaumount property trust ltd. (c) the rule in wheeldon v Burrows; his rule may apply to grant as easement in favour of a purchaser in two situations; (a) where there is a sale of part of the vendors land (b) where the vendor is disposing of all is/her property to two different purchasers.
Cite This Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below: