Sader v Langham [2018] NSWSC 727

Sader v Langham [2018] NSWSC 727

The works carried out by the defendants did not amount to a real substantial interference with the plaintiffs’ enjoyment of their rights of way. Comparing the physical conditions before and after the works, access along the right of way was problematic if not impossible prior to the works, and the works ultimately improved access and did not make passing and re-passing substantially more difficult. The plaintiffs did not establish any real diminution in land value due to the works, and their damages claim lacked evidentiary support.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Mark Anthony Sader; Second Plaintiff: Sandra Sader; First Defendant: Angela Louise Langham; Second Defendant: Margaret Williamson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Statement of Claim dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Easements, Rights of Way, Obstruction and Interference, Damages, Construction of Easements
Equity Land Law Easements Rights of Way Obstruction and Interference Damages Construction of Easements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Anthony Sader

First Plaintiff

Sandra Sader

Second Plaintiff

Angela Louise Langham

First Defendant

Margaret Williamson

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the works constructed by the first defendant amount to a substantial interference with the plaintiffs’ rights of way
  2. 2 Proper construction of the easements and whether rights permit vehicular use
  3. 3 Whether the works diminished the value of the plaintiffs’ land

Ratio Decidendi

The works carried out by the defendants did not amount to a real substantial interference with the plaintiffs’ enjoyment of their rights of way. Comparing the physical conditions before and after the works, access along the right of way was problematic if not impossible prior to the works, and the works ultimately improved access and did not make passing and re-passing substantially more difficult. The plaintiffs did not establish any real diminution in land value due to the works, and their damages claim lacked evidentiary support.

Court Disposition

Statement of Claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The Statement of Claim is dismissed.
  • The plaintiffs are ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings.