6 Aug 2009
ASMUSSEN V HAJNAL AND RELICH AND ORS HC NEL CIV 2004 442 148
- Citation
- openlaw-f82ef39b_7c8e_40aa_a5b7_6fe1a0f73ab4.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Because all alternative access options were found impracticable or unreasonably costly, the existing driveway had been used for around 60 years, the plaintiff purchased under a genuine mistake about legal access, and on balance fairness required remedial relief, the Court exercised its s129B discretion to grant an easement over the part of the existing driveway crossing No.136 in favour of No.142, conditioned on payment of compensation ($35,000), payment of the first defendants' reasonable legal expenses for formalisation and registration, and obtaining NCC permission under s348(1) LGA; costs…
- Right of way
- S129b property law act 1952
- Easement grant and compensation
- Landlocked land
- Court discretion/remedial relief
- Registration of easement