Clements & Ors v Goodacre [2004] EWCA Civ 1406 (11 October 2004)

Clements & Ors v Goodacre [2004] EWCA Civ 1406 (11 October 2004)

The appeal was dismissed because the judge's findings established that the 1973 boundary agreement defined the boundary, the wedge was included in the respondents' title, the registered boundary was not definitive, there was no evidence of an intention to reserve the wedge, and no easement of necessity arose as alternative access existed.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 1406
Parties
Claimants/respondents: Edward John Clements & Barbara Clements; Claimants/respondents: John Kendall Bush & Catriona Mary Bush; Defendant/appellant: Brian Vincent Goodacre
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Issue Estoppel, Easements of Necessity, Land Registration
Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Issue Estoppel Easements of Necessity Land Registration

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward John Clements & Barbara Clements

Claimants/respondents

John Kendall Bush & Catriona Mary Bush

Claimants/respondents

Brian Vincent Goodacre

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disputed 'wedge' of land belonged to the appellant or the respondents
  2. 2 Whether issue estoppel arising from 1990 proceedings precluded the respondents' claim
  3. 3 Whether an easement of necessity existed over the wedge

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the judge's findings established that the 1973 boundary agreement defined the boundary, the wedge was included in the respondents' title, the registered boundary was not definitive, there was no evidence of an intention to reserve the wedge, and no easement of necessity arose as alternative access existed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Application to amend statement of case refused