Landale v Menzies [1909] HCA 48

Landale v Menzies [1909] HCA 48

The parties were bound by an implied agreement granting each exclusive occupation of land and water on their sides of the fence, subject to reasonable notice for termination; removal of the fence and deprivation of access without sufficient notice constituted unlawful interference and entitled relief in equity, including declaration, injunction, and inquiry as to damages.

Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Robert Hunter Landale; Respondents (defendants): Menzies and another (Executors of Henry Ricketson)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 August 1909
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment and decree appealed from discharged.
Legal Topics
Tenancy at Will, Reasonable Notice, Dividing Fences, Implied Agreement, Exclusive Occupation, Injunction, Damages
Property Law Equity Landlord and Tenant Tenancy at Will Reasonable Notice Dividing Fences Implied Agreement Exclusive Occupation +2 more

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 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Hunter Landale

Appellant (plaintiff)

Menzies and another (Executors of Henry Ricketson)

Respondents (defendants)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a tenancy at will can be implied between parties occupying land separated by a 'give and take' fence
  2. 2 Whether such tenancy requires reasonable notice to terminate
  3. 3 Whether removal of the fence and deprivation of waterhole constituted trespass or breach of agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The parties were bound by an implied agreement granting each exclusive occupation of land and water on their sides of the fence, subject to reasonable notice for termination; removal of the fence and deprivation of access without sufficient notice constituted unlawful interference and entitled relief in equity, including declaration, injunction, and inquiry as to damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment and decree appealed from discharged.

Orders

  • Declaration that plaintiff is entitled under the 1895 agreement to exclusive occupation of land and water north of the fence as it stood on 9 April 1908 until agreement terminated by reasonable notice by either party.
  • Injunction restraining defendants until such termination from interfering with occupation or destroying/interfering with the fence except for maintenance/repair.