Silkstone and another v Tatnall and another
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1141) 15 October 2011, 116-123(8)Publication details: 2011Subject(s): Summary: [2011] EWCA Civ 801; [2011] 41 EG 116, 14 July 2011. Concerns the lodging of a unilateral notice by S asserting a right of way on T's land. T applied to cancel the notice, and S objected. The matter was referred to an adjudicator. Shortly before the hearing date, S asked for permission to withdraw their case, due to difficulties in getting some evidence, and reserving the right to bring court proceedings on the matter in the future. The adjudicator proceeded with the hearing and found for T. S appealed against the decision. "Held": appeal dismissed. The relevant issue was the merits of the unilateral notice, and one party could not terminate the reference of the matter to an adjudicator to avoid a decision on the merits of the unilateral notice.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L154127 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 154127-2001 |
[2011] EWCA Civ 801; [2011] 41 EG 116, 14 July 2011. Concerns the lodging of a unilateral notice by S asserting a right of way on T's land. T applied to cancel the notice, and S objected. The matter was referred to an adjudicator. Shortly before the hearing date, S asked for permission to withdraw their case, due to difficulties in getting some evidence, and reserving the right to bring court proceedings on the matter in the future. The adjudicator proceeded with the hearing and found for T. S appealed against the decision. "Held": appeal dismissed. The relevant issue was the merits of the unilateral notice, and one party could not terminate the reference of the matter to an adjudicator to avoid a decision on the merits of the unilateral notice.