Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Copeland v Greenhalf

[1952] Ch 488

Case summary last updated at 08/01/2020 15:57 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Copeland v Greenhalf

For fifty years D had left vehicles on P’s land and P sought to restrain him from doing so. D claimed prescriptive easement. The court denied an easement since the right exercised and claimed was too extensive to constitute an easement in law, as it amounted practically to a claim to the whole beneficial use of the land over which it had been exercised. 
Upjohn J: Because of the extent of the supposed right (right to leave possessions there for an indeterminate period anywhere on the land), it cannot come within easement. In reality, beneficial use/joint use is claimed, and D would have to argue for possession through adverse possession if he seeks to establish a right of this magnitude. The right claimed was described as having a problem of “vagueness”. 

Copeland v Greenhalf crops up in following areas of law