Peacock and another v Custins and another
Series: Estates Gazette ; [2000] 13 EG 152-158 (7)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: CA 14 November 2000. Claimants P. owned agricultural land which had the benefit of a right of way over land (yellow) belonging to defendents C. Easement expressed in title deeds as being a right of way 'at all times and at all purposes'. P sold part of a different property without retaining the right of way to part retained (blue) adjoining the red land. Red and blue land were let to a tenant. CC allowed P's claim that they were entitled to access the blue land but made declarations as to the width and location of the right of way. C's appeal contesting that P's use of the yellow land to trespass was allowed in part. Held P was not entitled to use the yellow land for the purposes for cultivation but contractors sale was allowable to establish the width and location of the right of way.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS63791 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 112191-1001 |
CA 14 November 2000. Claimants P. owned agricultural land which had the benefit of a right of way over land (yellow) belonging to defendents C. Easement expressed in title deeds as being a right of way 'at all times and at all purposes'. P sold part of a different property without retaining the right of way to part retained (blue) adjoining the red land. Red and blue land were let to a tenant. CC allowed P's claim that they were entitled to access the blue land but made declarations as to the width and location of the right of way. C's appeal contesting that P's use of the yellow land to trespass was allowed in part. Held P was not entitled to use the yellow land for the purposes for cultivation but contractors sale was allowable to establish the width and location of the right of way.