Holmes & Anor v Evans & Anor

Holmes & Anor v Evans & Anor

The appeal was dismissed because the procedural orders of Mr Recorder Keyser QC and His Honour Graham Jones, which were not appealed, conclusively determined the existence of the vehicular right of way, limiting the trial to ancillary issues. The trial judge was bound by those orders and could not revisit the existence of the right. The defendants' attempt to withdraw their concession was procedurally barred.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Erik Alfred John Holmes; Appellant/defendant: Amanda Gail Davies; Respondent/claimant: Tracey Ann Evans; Respondent/claimant: David Anthony Evans
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Prescriptive Easement, Right of Way, Injunctions, Procedural Bar, Lost Modern Grant
Property Law Civil Procedure Prescriptive Easement Right of Way Injunctions Procedural Bar Lost Modern Grant

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erik Alfred John Holmes

Appellant/defendant

Amanda Gail Davies

Appellant/defendant

Tracey Ann Evans

Respondent/claimant

David Anthony Evans

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants had a prescriptive vehicular right of way over the defendants' land
  2. 2 Whether procedural rulings precluded the trial judge from reconsidering the existence of the right of way
  3. 3 Whether the defendants could withdraw their prior concession to the right of way

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the procedural orders of Mr Recorder Keyser QC and His Honour Graham Jones, which were not appealed, conclusively determined the existence of the vehicular right of way, limiting the trial to ancillary issues. The trial judge was bound by those orders and could not revisit the existence of the right. The defendants' attempt to withdraw their concession was procedurally barred.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs order in court below stands
  • No order as to costs of appeal