ER Ives Investment Ltd v High 
- Both High and a third party purchased adjoining plots of unregistered land
- High was in the process of building a house on his land, and the third party a block of flats on his
- The foundations of the the third party’s flats trespassed on High’s land, therefore it was agreed that the trespassing would be allowed if High could have a right of access to his property over the third party’s land
- The completed block of flats was sold twice, with the latter conveyance notifying the most recent owners, Ives, of the agreement
- High subsequently built a garage in reliance of the fact of the mutual ‘rights of way’ agreement
- Could Ives be granted an injunction to stop High using the right of way, as it was not recorded on the Land Charges Register under the Land Charges Act 1972?
- Proprietary estoppel was made out following Inwards v Baker , and could overrule section 4 of the Land Charges Act, which would normally defeat unregistered equitable rights of way
- Ives could not enjoy the benefit of their trespassing without allowing High’s right of way, under the doctrine of benefit and burden; although such a finding by Lord Denning questions whether the doctrine requires formal creation or not (suggesting not) and whether the doctrine’s requirements of a linked benefit and burden and a relevant benefit and burden are truly separate requirements (suggesting so)
Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 27th April 2015