[2007] EWCA Civ 309, 13 March 2007. The appellant appealed against a declaration made in favour of the respondent regarding the respondents right of emergency egress over the appellant 's property. The appellant and the respondent owned adjoining properties. Under the terms of a clause in the transfer agreement, the respondent could in the case of emergency, cross the appellant 's roof and use his external staircase to exit provided that the roof and external staircase continued to exist. The appellant obtained planning permission and removed both the roof and the external staircase. The respondent brought proceedings and the judge made a declaration that the respondent's right under the clause was extant and ordered the appelant to provide the respondent's property with an alternative means of escape. "Held": the judge had erred in his conclusion. The right of emergency egress was granted only as long as the roof and the staircase existed.