Price & Anor v Nunn

Price & Anor v Nunn

There is an issue estoppel preventing Mr Nunn from asserting that Woodside Bungalow has the benefit of a private right of way over the lower track, as he is a privy of Mr Close. There is no issue estoppel preventing Mr Nunn from relying on a claimed public right of way as a defence to trespass or to seek a negative declaration, as in that context he is not a privy. Claims for damages or injunctions in public nuisance based on a public right of way may be subject to estoppel, but if Mr Nunn succeeds in his defence to trespass, that will constitute a special circumstance displacing estoppel. There is no abuse of process in Mr Nunn raising the issue of a public right of way in these...

Parties
Claimant: Christopher Charles Price; Claimant: Charles Frederick Price; Defendant: Jonathan James Nunn
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Parts of Defence and Counterclaim
Outcome
Application to strike out parts of Defence and Counterclaim allowed in part and dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Private Right of Way, Public Right of Way, Privity, Nuisance
Civil Procedure Property Law Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process Private Right of Way Public Right of Way Privity +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 6 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Charles Price

Claimant

Charles Frederick Price

Claimant

Jonathan James Nunn

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Parts of Defence and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Nunn is estopped from asserting a private or public right of way over the lower track by reason of previous litigation between the Prices and his predecessors in title
  2. 2 Whether Mr Nunn is a privy of Mr and Mrs Close for the purposes of estoppel
  3. 3 Whether there are special circumstances or new evidence to displace issue estoppel

Ratio Decidendi

There is an issue estoppel preventing Mr Nunn from asserting that Woodside Bungalow has the benefit of a private right of way over the lower track, as he is a privy of Mr Close. There is no issue estoppel preventing Mr Nunn from relying on a claimed public right of way as a defence to trespass or to seek a negative declaration, as in that context he is not a privy. Claims for damages or injunctions in public nuisance based on a public right of way may be subject to estoppel, but if Mr Nunn succeeds in his defence to trespass, that will constitute a special circumstance displacing estoppel. There is no abuse of process in Mr Nunn raising the issue of a public right of way in these...

Court Disposition

Application to strike out parts of Defence and Counterclaim allowed in part and dismissed in part

Orders

  • Mr Nunn is estopped from asserting a private right of way over the lower track for the benefit of Woodside Bungalow.
  • Mr Nunn is not estopped from relying on a claimed public right of way as a defence to trespass or to seek a negative declaration.