Implied reservation of easement of necessity claim rejected

Adealon International Proprietary Limited v Merton London Borough Council [2007] EWCA Civ 362.

The Court of Appeal has upheld the High Court's decision to reject a landowner's claim for the implied reservation of an easement of necessity.

The landowner sold off land that adjoined its property on three sides, speculating that it would obtain planning permission for access to the retained land from the public highway which ran along the fourth boundary of the property.

When the planning application was refused, the landowner claimed an easement of necessity over the land that had been sold off. The claim was rejected by both courts, on the basis that any rights of way required by the landowner could have been expressly reserved in the transfer when the adjoining land was sold off.
PLC Property


The full text of this resource is available by logging in or by requesting a trial. If you have any questions, please contact us or your Practical Law Account Executive.

Free trial

A free trial will give you:

Unlimited access to our online legal know-how services during the trial period
Full training and support
Four issues of Practical Law The Journal, the companion to Practical Law online
Weekly update e-mails on current legal developments in your practice area

Log in using Practical Law username

Only use this login if you have not set up OnePass for Practical Law

{ "siteName" : "PLC", "objType" : "PLC_Doc_C", "objID" : "1247247264059", "objName" : "Implied reservation of easement of necessity claim rejected", "userID" : "2", "objUrl" : "", "pageType" : "Resource", "academicUserID" : "", "contentAccessed" : "false", "analyticsPermCookie" : "2-34f33658:15b17c9cf16:-1373", "analyticsSessionCookie" : "2-34f33658:15b17c9cf16:-1372", "statisticSensorPath" : "" }