Din v Edwards (Right of way - vehicular and pedestrian) [2025] UKFTT 1159 (PC) (23 September 2025)

Din v Edwards (Right of way - vehicular and pedestrian) [2025] UKFTT 1159 (PC) (23 September 2025)

The applicant established, on the balance of probabilities, over 20 years' continuous, open, and as-of-right vehicular and pedestrian use of the Track to access the rear of Bryn Pistyll, without consent or licence from the owner or his predecessors. The evidence did not support the respondent's assertion that use was with consent or under licence. Therefore, a prescriptive right of way was acquired.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 1159 (PC)
Parties
Applicant: Freda Din; Respondent: Philip Wyn Edwards
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Land Registration Dispute / First Tier Tribunal (property Chamber) Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application allowed; objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Prescriptive Easements, Right of Way, Vehicular Access, Pedestrian Access, Land Registry Objections
Property Law Land Registration Prescriptive Easements Right of Way Vehicular Access Pedestrian Access Land Registry Objections

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Freda Din

Applicant

Philip Wyn Edwards

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Registration Dispute / First Tier Tribunal (property Chamber) Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a prescriptive vehicular and pedestrian right of way exists over the Track for the benefit of Bryn Pistyll based on 20 years' use
  2. 2 Whether the use was with sufficient continuity and without consent or licence from the owner of the servient land

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established, on the balance of probabilities, over 20 years' continuous, open, and as-of-right vehicular and pedestrian use of the Track to access the rear of Bryn Pistyll, without consent or licence from the owner or his predecessors. The evidence did not support the respondent's assertion that use was with consent or under licence. Therefore, a prescriptive right of way was acquired.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; objection dismissed

Orders

  • Chief Land Registrar to allow the Application and register the prescriptive vehicular and pedestrian right of way over the Track for the benefit of Bryn Pistyll.
  • Either party may apply for a costs order within the specified time, with written submissions and a schedule of costs.