Gilks & Anor v Hodgson & Anor

Gilks & Anor v Hodgson & Anor

The boundary of Fiveacres is the ditch, not the centre line of Clay Lane. The Respondents acquired a prescriptive vehicular right of way for agricultural purposes over Clay Lane to the east, but not to the south, based on evidence of use without permission and acquiescence by the owner.

Parties
Claimants/respondents: Richard Thomas Gilks & Another; Defendants/appellants: Adrian Vernon Hodgson & Another
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Easements, Prescription, Right of Way, Damages, Costs
Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Easements Prescription Right of Way Damages Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Thomas Gilks & Another

Claimants/respondents

Adrian Vernon Hodgson & Another

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the eastern boundary of Fiveacres?
  2. 2 Does Fiveacres have a vehicular right of way for agricultural purposes over Clay Lane to the east and/or south?
  3. 3 Was a prescriptive right of way acquired?

Ratio Decidendi

The boundary of Fiveacres is the ditch, not the centre line of Clay Lane. The Respondents acquired a prescriptive vehicular right of way for agricultural purposes over Clay Lane to the east, but not to the south, based on evidence of use without permission and acquiescence by the owner.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part

Orders

  • Appeal allowed on boundary issue; boundary is the ditch.
  • Appeal allowed against finding of vehicular right of way to the south.