000			01552cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS63089
008			000000n2000 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u109726
245			_aHair and another v Gillman
260			_c2000
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2000] 48 EG 117-121(5)
520			_aCA 17 February 2000. B owned commercial property with land which he used to build a school. The appellent (G) purchased the school from B in 1979, before which G had occupied as a tenant. The respondents (H) bought the commercial property from B in 1985, which included a forecourt for parking cars. RI held leases on the commercial property and used the forecourt for parking cars. The leases did not include the forecourt, but H did not object to its use by RI and his clients. G claimed when she purchased the school, an implied grant of easement to park on the forecourt existed in accordance with the Law of Property Act 1925 s62, and alleged that RI was preventing her from parking. H's claim for a declaration that G had no right to park was granted. G appealed. "Held", appeal allowed. The informal permission to use the forecourt granted by B when G was a tenant, turned into an easement under the Law of Property Act 1925 s62 when G purchased the school building.
590			_aABS
650			_aHAIR V GILLMAN AND INSKIP
650			_aIMPLIED GRANT
650			_aEASEMENT
650			_aLAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 S62
650			_aPARKING
650			_aFORECOURT
690			_aBoundary disputes _96221
942			_n0
999			_c65494 _d65494