Facts
- Land was conveyed and left landlocked
- The owner claimed that an easement of necessity had been granted over a bridge, which was the only means of access
Issue
- Had an easement of necessity been granted?
Decision
- Yes
Reasoning
- An old covenant must be interpreted in its circumstances, not in light of public policy, allowing the easement of necessity to have been impliedly granted
- Intentions of parties will override public policy where easements of necessity are concerned
- Public policy may be used to frustrate intentions though (as opposed to helping to interpret them)
