Case news: CDC2020 v G Ferreira and another
Language: English Series: Property Week ; 70(21) 27 May 2005, 71(1) | Estates Gazette ; [2005] 35 EG 112-116(5)Publication details: 2005Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Discusses the case "CDC 2020 v G Ferreira and another" ([2005] EWCA Civ 1611, unreported), which considered whether a hotel freeholder (CDC) had the benefit of a right of way across it's neighbour's land to access the hotel's three garages. The claimants (F) contended that the right of way, which had been enjoyed by a previous owner, was no longer valid as it referred to different garages on the same site and had been abandoned when he had knocked down these garages. The County Court disagreed with F, arguing that the right had not been abandoned as CDC's predecessor showed intention to claim a wider right of way inclusive of the original right. "Held": CA dismissed F's claim, stating that the beneficiary of the right would have had to show an intention to abandon it.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L130048 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 130048-1001 |
Discusses the case "CDC 2020 v G Ferreira and another" ([2005] EWCA Civ 1611, unreported), which considered whether a hotel freeholder (CDC) had the benefit of a right of way across it's neighbour's land to access the hotel's three garages. The claimants (F) contended that the right of way, which had been enjoyed by a previous owner, was no longer valid as it referred to different garages on the same site and had been abandoned when he had knocked down these garages. The County Court disagreed with F, arguing that the right had not been abandoned as CDC's predecessor showed intention to claim a wider right of way inclusive of the original right. "Held": CA dismissed F's claim, stating that the beneficiary of the right would have had to show an intention to abandon it.