Neil Gould v Nadine Morgan Gould & Anor

Neil Gould v Nadine Morgan Gould & Anor

The express vehicular right of way granted by the 1949 conveyance, as reflected in the 1964 conveyance, extends to the north side of Cwm Tawe Villa, allowing claimants to park vehicles at their hardstanding. The context and wording of the grant, together with physical circumstances at the time, support this interpretation. Alternative bases (section 62, estoppel, prescription) do not alter the outcome. Damages, not injunction, are appropriate for the installation of the water pipe. Both parties are entitled to nominal damages for blocking the track.

Parties
Claimant: Neil Gould; Claimant: Nadine Morgan Gould; Defendant: Carol Esteban
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Claimants succeed in declaration of right of way; nominal damages awarded to both sides; general damages for water pipe to defendant; all other claims and counterclaims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Express Grant of Right of Way, Construction of Conveyance, Proprietary Estoppel, Prescription, Damages, Injunction
Property Law Easements Express Grant of Right of Way Construction of Conveyance Proprietary Estoppel Prescription Damages Injunction

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 8 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Gould

Claimant

Nadine Morgan Gould

Claimant

Carol Esteban

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Extent of express vehicular right of way to Cwm Tawe Villa
  2. 2 Interpretation of 1949 and 1964 conveyances
  3. 3 Alternative bases for right of way (section 62, estoppel, prescription)

Ratio Decidendi

The express vehicular right of way granted by the 1949 conveyance, as reflected in the 1964 conveyance, extends to the north side of Cwm Tawe Villa, allowing claimants to park vehicles at their hardstanding. The context and wording of the grant, together with physical circumstances at the time, support this interpretation. Alternative bases (section 62, estoppel, prescription) do not alter the outcome. Damages, not injunction, are appropriate for the installation of the water pipe. Both parties are entitled to nominal damages for blocking the track.

Court Disposition

Claimants succeed in declaration of right of way; nominal damages awarded to both sides; general damages for water pipe to defendant; all other claims and counterclaims dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that claimants' express right of way includes vehicular access to northwest corner of villa.
  • Claimants to continue undertakings for 12 months not to park on track except incidentally to right.