Site Developments (Ferndown) Ltd & Ors v Cuthbury Ltd & Ors [2010] EWHC 10 (Ch) (13 January 2010)

Site Developments (Ferndown) Ltd & Ors v Cuthbury Ltd & Ors [2010] EWHC 10 (Ch) (13 January 2010)

The court held that the claimants were entitled to rights of way over the disputed strips under the 1926 and 1927 transfers, that the claimants had acquired title to certain strips by adverse possession, and that parts of the land had become public highway by dedication or adoption. The restrictive covenants were not enforceable by Cuthbury, and the claimants were entitled to pass services under the land. The defendants' claims to prevent access and enforce covenants failed.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 10 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Site Developments (Ferndown) Limited; Claimant: Canford Renewable Energy Limited; Claimant: Stephen Allen; Claimant: David Andrew Parfitt (the receiver of the estate of William Edward Charles Knott deceased); Defendant: Cuthbury Limited; Defendant: Derek Simester; Defendant: Avril Simester
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / First Instance Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claimants succeed on the main issues; defendants' claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Restrictive Covenants, Easements and Rights of Way, Dedication of Highway, Land Registration, Boundary Disputes
Property Law Land Law Equity Adverse Possession Restrictive Covenants Easements and Rights of Way Dedication of Highway Land Registration +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Site Developments (Ferndown) Limited

Claimant

Canford Renewable Energy Limited

Claimant

Stephen Allen

Claimant

David Andrew Parfitt (the receiver of the estate of William Edward Charles Knott deceased)

Claimant

Cuthbury Limited

Defendant

Derek Simester

Defendant

Avril Simester

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / First Instance Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1926 and 1927 transfers left a gap between the land transferred and Mannings Heath Road and the nature and extent of any right of way thereby granted
  2. 2 Whether the claimants acquired the disputed strips of land by adverse possession
  3. 3 Whether the disputed strips form part of the public highway by dedication or adoption

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the claimants were entitled to rights of way over the disputed strips under the 1926 and 1927 transfers, that the claimants had acquired title to certain strips by adverse possession, and that parts of the land had become public highway by dedication or adoption. The restrictive covenants were not enforceable by Cuthbury, and the claimants were entitled to pass services under the land. The defendants' claims to prevent access and enforce covenants failed.

Court Disposition

Claimants succeed on the main issues; defendants' claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that claimants have rights of way over the disputed strips
  • Declaration of title by adverse possession to certain strips in favour of claimants