A tenant claimed the right to use a lavatory on another floor of the building in which he lived. The tenants of that floor objected to his use of it.
One question was whether the right to use the toilet would be capable of being an easement.
CA held that it was.
There is no doubt what were intended to be the dominant and servient tenements respectively, and the right was appurtenant to the former and calculated to enhance its beneficial use and enjoyment.
There is no problem of vagueness.
It is true that during the times when the dominant owner exercised the right, the owner of the servient tenement would be excluded, but this in greater or less degree is a common feature of many easements (for example, rights of way).
A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedThese product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
GDL Land Law | Easements Notes (16 pages) |
Land Law | Easements Notes (11 pages) |
Land Law | Easements Notes (48 pages) |