Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) (25 May 2012)

Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) (25 May 2012)

The leaseholders' rights to use designated parking spaces are easements, not demises. The landlord has no express or implied right to unilaterally reallocate or build over the spaces, and fencing off or building constitutes substantial interference. Claimants are prima facie entitled to an injunction to restrain interference; no exceptional circumstances justify refusing it.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Howard John Kettel and others; Defendant: Bloomfold Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Property/easement Dispute / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claimants succeed; injunction granted.
Legal Topics
Easement to Park, Lease Interpretation, Remedies for Interference With Property Rights, Injunction Vs Damages
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Easements Easement to Park Lease Interpretation Remedies for Interference With Property Rights Injunction Vs 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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Howard John Kettel and others

Claimant

Bloomfold Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Property/easement Dispute / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the leaseholders' right to use designated parking spaces is a demise or an easement
  2. 2 Whether the landlord can unilaterally reallocate parking spaces
  3. 3 Whether the landlord has reserved rights to build on parking spaces

Ratio Decidendi

The leaseholders' rights to use designated parking spaces are easements, not demises. The landlord has no express or implied right to unilaterally reallocate or build over the spaces, and fencing off or building constitutes substantial interference. Claimants are prima facie entitled to an injunction to restrain interference; no exceptional circumstances justify refusing it.

Court Disposition

Claimants succeed; injunction granted.

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from interfering with claimants' easements to park in designated spaces.
  • Defendant prohibited from building over or fencing off the designated parking spaces.