The National Trust v Fleming & Ors [2009] EWHC 1789 (Ch) (17 July 2009)

The National Trust v Fleming & Ors [2009] EWHC 1789 (Ch) (17 July 2009)

The arbitrator's decision that the use of caravans to house migrant workers was within the Proviso of the 1966 Deed, as it was necessary for the cultivation of salad crops in accordance with the custom of the country, was not obviously wrong and was supported by the evidence. Therefore, leave to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1789 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty; Respondents: William Fleming and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996, Restrictive Covenants, Interpretation of Agricultural Covenants, Custom of the Country in Agriculture
Arbitration Property Law Covenants Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996 Restrictive Covenants Interpretation of Agricultural Covenants Custom of the Country in Agriculture

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty

Claimant

William Fleming and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the construction and use of a caravan site for migrant workers breaches restrictive covenants in the 1966 Deed
  2. 2 Whether such use falls within the Proviso allowing cultivation in the ordinary course of agriculture or husbandry in accordance with the custom of the country
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's decision was 'obviously wrong' under section 69(3)(c)(i) of the Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator's decision that the use of caravans to house migrant workers was within the Proviso of the 1966 Deed, as it was necessary for the cultivation of salad crops in accordance with the custom of the country, was not obviously wrong and was supported by the evidence. Therefore, leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is refused