Kennerley v Beech & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 158 (21 February 2012)

Kennerley v Beech & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 158 (21 February 2012)

The southern boundary between Old Westwick and Ruckstones is the centre of the hedge at the top of the bank, as indicated by the conveyance plans and contemporaneous features, not the edge of the rope-edged path. The right of way over the wiggly path was not a valid easement as it did not accommodate the dominant tenement but was a personal right for a specific purpose, and thus is not enforceable against successors in title.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 158
Parties
Defendant/appellant: John William Frank Kennerley; Claimant/respondent: Eric Edward Beech; Claimant/respondent: Jill Paula Beech
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Easements, Adverse Possession, Interpretation of Conveyances
Property Law Boundary Disputes Easements Adverse Possession Interpretation of Conveyances

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John William Frank Kennerley

Defendant/appellant

Eric Edward Beech

Claimant/respondent

Jill Paula Beech

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct location of the southern boundary between Old Westwick and Ruckstones?
  2. 2 Does the owner of Old Westwick retain a right of way over the 'wiggly path'?
  3. 3 Was any right of way extinguished or abandoned?

Ratio Decidendi

The southern boundary between Old Westwick and Ruckstones is the centre of the hedge at the top of the bank, as indicated by the conveyance plans and contemporaneous features, not the edge of the rope-edged path. The right of way over the wiggly path was not a valid easement as it did not accommodate the dominant tenement but was a personal right for a specific purpose, and thus is not enforceable against successors in title.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The decision of the county court judge is affirmed.
  • No right of way exists over the wiggly path in favour of Old Westwick.