ER Ives Investment Ltd v High [1967]

Facts

  • 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

Issue

  • 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?

Decision

  • No

Reasoning

  • Proprietary estoppel was made out following Inwards v Baker [1965], 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)
RELATED CASE  Pilcher v Rawlings (1872)

Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 27th April 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy