Knock v. Knock

Knock v. Knock

The prescriptive claim failed because there was an unexplained cessation of user for the full year immediately preceding the action caused by the defendant's fence and maintained such that prescription was interrupted under the statute; additionally the claimed winter track was not a formed, continuous or necessary way that would pass by implication on severance, so no easement vested—appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Citation
(1897) 27 SCR 664
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Sophia C. Knock; Plaintiff Respondent: Joseph Knock
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 November 1897
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of court below reversed and plaintiff's action dismissed.
Legal Topics
Right of Way, Easement by Prescription, Easement by Necessity, Interruption and Acquiescence, Implied Grant Upon Severance
Source Language
English
Property Law Easements Prescription and Limitation Right of Way Easement by Prescription Easement by Necessity Interruption and Acquiescence Implied Grant Upon Severance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sophia C. Knock

Defendant Appellant

Joseph Knock

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a prescriptive easement was acquired by twenty years' actual user prior to action
  2. 2 Whether obstruction and subsequent acquiescence/ submission interrupted prescription under the statute
  3. 3 Whether winter‑only, unformed track can constitute a continuous/apparent easement or pass by implication on severance

Ratio Decidendi

The prescriptive claim failed because there was an unexplained cessation of user for the full year immediately preceding the action caused by the defendant's fence and maintained such that prescription was interrupted under the statute; additionally the claimed winter track was not a formed, continuous or necessary way that would pass by implication on severance, so no easement vested—appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of court below reversed and plaintiff's action dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Action dismissed with costs.