Taylor v Burton & Anor

Taylor v Burton & Anor

The judge's finding of substantial interference with the right of way was not plainly wrong and was supported by evidence. The trial judge erred in not separately considering the reserved costs of the amendment and the costs of the interim injunction; the conventional order should be made for amendment costs, and the Burtons were not entitled to costs of the interim injunction. The overall costs order in favour of the Burtons was within the trial judge's discretion and should not be disturbed.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: David Michael John Taylor; Respondent/claimant: Paul Arthur Burton; Respondent/claimant: Janette Anne Burton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Right of Way, Easements, Prescription, Costs, Injunctions, Rectification of Title
Property Law Civil Procedure Right of Way Easements Prescription Costs Injunctions Rectification of Title

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

Parties

David Michael John Taylor

Appellant/defendant

Paul Arthur Burton

Respondent/claimant

Janette Anne Burton

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in finding substantial interference with the Burtons’ right of way
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in his orders as to costs, including costs of amendment and interim injunction
  3. 3 Whether the Burtons were entitled to rectification of title and damages for interference with right of way

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's finding of substantial interference with the right of way was not plainly wrong and was supported by evidence. The trial judge erred in not separately considering the reserved costs of the amendment and the costs of the interim injunction; the conventional order should be made for amendment costs, and the Burtons were not entitled to costs of the interim injunction. The overall costs order in favour of the Burtons was within the trial judge's discretion and should not be disturbed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Ground 2 (substantial interference) dismissed; trial judge's finding upheld.
  • Ground 5 (costs of amendment): Burtons to bear costs of and occasioned by the amendment.