Adrienne Ryan v Margaret Mary Sutherland [2011] NSWSC 1397

Adrienne Ryan v Margaret Mary Sutherland [2011] NSWSC 1397

The restriction as to user is valid and enforceable against Mrs Ryan, whether characterised as an easement or a restrictive covenant, because it does not confer exclusive and unrestricted use of the whole servient tenement and is negative in substance; thus, Mrs Ryan's claims are dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Adrienne Ryan; Defendant: Margaret Mary Sutherland
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Determination
Outcome
Plaintiff's summons dismissed; restriction as to user upheld as valid and enforceable.
Legal Topics
Easements, Restrictive Covenants, Validity of Restriction as to User, Enforceability Against Subsequent Purchaser

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 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adrienne Ryan

Plaintiff

Margaret Mary Sutherland

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Principal Judgment / Final Determination

  1. 1 Is the restriction as to user void?
  2. 2 Is the restriction as to user an easement or a restrictive covenant?
  3. 3 Is the restriction as to user valid/enforceable against Mrs Ryan?

Ratio Decidendi

The restriction as to user is valid and enforceable against Mrs Ryan, whether characterised as an easement or a restrictive covenant, because it does not confer exclusive and unrestricted use of the whole servient tenement and is negative in substance; thus, Mrs Ryan's claims are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summons dismissed; restriction as to user upheld as valid and enforceable.

Orders

  • The Summons be dismissed.
  • Mrs Ryan pay the costs of the proceedings.