000			01510cad a22001935a 4500
001			L138153
008			070521e2007 xxk f 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u138153
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aMegaro v Di Popolo Hotels _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[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.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aMEGARO V DI POPOLO HOTELS
651		4	_aEngland _y886-
690			_aBoundary disputes _96221
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/309.html _zView the item free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c107030 _d107030