John Rowlands v Victor Hughes & Ors

John Rowlands v Victor Hughes & Ors

The Claimant, as lawful occupier with exclusive possession, established a right of way over the Triangle by prescription and lost modern grant, based on over 20 years' continuous, as-of-right use. The First Defendant's obstruction was unjustified. An injunction is appropriate as damages would not adequately compensate the Claimant, and general damages are awarded for loss of enjoyment and inconvenience.

Parties
Claimant: John Trefor Rowlands; First Defendant: Victor Hughes; Second Defendant (executor of the Estate of Iris Rowlands Deceased): Huw Redvers Jones; Third Defendant (executor of the Estate of Iris Rowlands Deceased): Edward Huw Griffiths
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/access Rights) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Easements, Right of Way, Prescription, Lost Modern Grant, Injunctions, Damages
Property Law Equity and Trusts Easements Right of Way Prescription Lost Modern Grant Injunctions Damages

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Trefor Rowlands

Claimant

Victor Hughes

First Defendant

Huw Redvers Jones

Second Defendant (executor of the Estate of Iris Rowlands Deceased)

Edward Huw Griffiths

Third Defendant (executor of the Estate of Iris Rowlands Deceased)

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/access Rights) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Claimant have authority to bring the claim?
  2. 2 Does a right of way exist over the Triangle?
  3. 3 Is an injunction appropriate to restrain the First Defendant from blocking access?

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant, as lawful occupier with exclusive possession, established a right of way over the Triangle by prescription and lost modern grant, based on over 20 years' continuous, as-of-right use. The First Defendant's obstruction was unjustified. An injunction is appropriate as damages would not adequately compensate the Claimant, and general damages are awarded for loss of enjoyment and inconvenience.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration that the Claimant has a right of way over the Triangle on foot and with vehicles at all times and for all purposes associated with the use of the yard at Ty’n Pwll.
  • Final injunction restraining the First Defendant from obstructing the right of way over the Triangle.