Melfort Pier Holidays Ltd v. The Melfort Club & Ors [2006] ScotCS CSIH_61 (07 December 2006)
The Lord Ordinary was entitled to find that the pursuers had set out a prima facie case for the existence of a public right of way over the driveway based on prescriptive user, and the balance of convenience favoured granting interim interdict. The route across the driveway could constitute a variant to the public right of way along the public road.
- Citation
- [2006] ScotCS CSIH_61
- Parties
- Pursuers and Respondents: Melfort Pier Holidays Limited; Defenders and Reclaimers: The Melfort Club and Others
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 07 December 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Reclaiming Motion / Interim Interdict
- Outcome
- Reclaiming motion refused
- Legal Topics
- Public Right of Way, Prescriptive User, Interim Interdict
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Melfort Pier Holidays Limited
Pursuers and Respondents
The Melfort Club and Others
Defenders and Reclaimers
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion / Interim Interdict
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a public right of way can be constituted over a private driveway as an adjunct to a public road
- 2 Necessity of two public termini for a public right of way
- 3 Effect of prescriptive user in establishing a public right of way
Ratio Decidendi
The Lord Ordinary was entitled to find that the pursuers had set out a prima facie case for the existence of a public right of way over the driveway based on prescriptive user, and the balance of convenience favoured granting interim interdict. The route across the driveway could constitute a variant to the public right of way along the public road.
Court Disposition
Reclaiming motion refused
Orders
- Interim interdict in extended terms maintained
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment