Carpenter & Ors v Calico Quays Ltd & Anor

Carpenter & Ors v Calico Quays Ltd & Anor

The right of way granted by the Deed extends over the land coloured brown on the Plan, which includes both the tarmac surface and the grass verges, as determined by the relationship of plot boundaries and the parties' objective intentions at the time of the grant.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Alan J Carpenter; Claimant/respondent: Paul Leonard Tudor; Claimant/respondent: APAC Packaging Limited; Claimant/respondent: Merlion Capital Rothley Limited; Defendant/appellant: Calico Quays Limited; Defendant/appellant: Goodman Real Estate Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Right of Way, Interpretation of Deeds, Easements
Property Law Right of Way Interpretation of Deeds Easements

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan J Carpenter

Claimant/respondent

Paul Leonard Tudor

Claimant/respondent

APAC Packaging Limited

Claimant/respondent

Merlion Capital Rothley Limited

Claimant/respondent

Calico Quays Limited

Defendant/appellant

Goodman Real Estate Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the physical extent (width) of the right of way granted by the Deed dated 15 April 1999?
  2. 2 Does the right of way include the grass verges or only the tarmac surface?

Ratio Decidendi

The right of way granted by the Deed extends over the land coloured brown on the Plan, which includes both the tarmac surface and the grass verges, as determined by the relationship of plot boundaries and the parties' objective intentions at the time of the grant.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The declaration of the physical extent of the right of way as determined by the Judge is upheld.