EASEMENTS & PROFIT A

PRENDRE
Easements
Nature of an easement

 Right over another person’s land

 Eg right of way and right of light

 Right to use a washing line on the neighbour’s land
 (Drewell v Towler (1832) B & Ad. 735
 Right to park a car on another person’s land
 Patel v W.H. Smith (Eziot) Ltd (1987) 1 W.L.R. 853 at 859 Balcombe L.J.
MOST IMPORTANT CASE

 Re Ellenborough Park [1956] Ch 131

 Where for the first time, the right of householders to walk freely in a nearby park was
recognised as satisfying the requirements to qualify as an easement

 Once created the easement will run automatically with the dominant land and can be
enjoyed by any occupier of the land
 An easement exists to benefit the land as such it is necessary but not sufficient that the
person claiming the right must own the land
 The right must benefit the owner in that capacity
 There are two issues to consider:
 (i) mutual proximity of the two plots
 (ii) the nature of the advantage claimed
 Proximity
 The two plots of land must be reasonably close to each other but need not be physically
next to each other.
 Re Ellenborough Park [1956] Ch 131
 Nature of the claim
 The question is whether the right claimed has some natural connection with the estate or
whether it confers a personal advantage for the current owner of the estate
 This is a question of fact and the test to determine this matter is whether the right makes
the occupation or use of the dominant tenement more convenient.
 if dominant tenement is used for business purposes
 Hill v Tupper[1863] 2H & C 121
Dominant and servient tenement

 For a right to exist, the right must affect two plots of land
 In the right of way the person claiming the right does so in his capacity as owner of a
tenement over another plot of land.
 Definition of tenement
 An estate or holding of land
 The land that enjoys the benefit of the right = dominant tenement
 The land over which the right is exercised is = servient tenement
 An easement cannot exist in gross
 London and Blenheim Estates Ltd v Ladbroke Retail parks Ltd [1994] 1W.L.R 31 AT
36 P. Gibson L.J
Easements – Servient vs. Dominant

Servient Tenement

 Land burdened by the easement

 Land which “suffers” because of the easement

Dominant Tenement

 Land (if any) benefited by the easement

 Land which is made “more valuable” because of the easement