Easements, a fundamental concept in property and land law, often come into play when considering the installation of a signboard for a public house.
One critical aspect of easements is the "twenty years user" principle, which may imply an easement by grant. This principle holds that if a signboard has been used continuously for twenty years or more without interruption and in a manner consistent with an easement, it may be inferred that the landowner has implicitly granted an easement for the signboard's use.
This implication of a grant is a key legal concept that plays a significant role in establishing and recognizing easements and ensuring the rights of parties involved in property and land arrangements.
The Plaintiffs, the proprietors of a public house, asserted their entitlement to attach a signboard to the wall of the Defendants' property. This signboard had been affixed for a duration exceeding forty years. The historical context was that the same individual had previously owned both houses, with the Defendants' house being conveyed away before the Plaintiffs' house.
It was relevant to note that when the owner, as mentioned above, held ownership of both properties, the Plaintiffs' house was not in use as a public house. Notably, the historical record did not clarify whether the signboard's initial attachment to the Defendants' house transpired during the period of common ownership.
The court's ruling emphasized that it was unreasonable to presume that the signboard had been initially affixed during the period of common ownership.
Furthermore, the court determined that the easement in question was indeed a legal one, and it was presumed that the Defendants' predecessors in title had granted this easement to the Plaintiffs' predecessors in title.
Consequently, an injunction was issued prohibiting the Defendants from removing the signboard.
The "twenty years user" principle, implying an easement by grant, is pivotal. If a signboard has been consistently used for over twenty years without interruption and in a manner consistent with an easement, it may imply an implicit grant from the landowner. Such implications are crucial for property rights.
The Plaintiffs, who owned a public house, claimed the right to attach a signboard to the Defendants' property, which had been in place for over forty years. Both houses were formerly under the same owner, with the Defendants' house transferred before the Plaintiffs. However, it remained uncertain whether the signboard was initially installed during the common ownership period.
The court emphasized the impracticality of assuming common ownership. It recognized the claimed easement as legal and presumed it was granted by the Defendants' predecessors to the Plaintiffs' predecessors.
The court issued an injunction preventing the removal of the signboard, highlighting the significance of legal principles and historical context in property rights determinations.
Plaintiff had put a sign for his pub on Defendant’s wall for 40-50 years.
Fry J ruled that this was an easement.
Although no evidence could be adduced to show that the sign was first erected with legal permission, he said that since it was “evidently convenient, and in one sense necessary, for the enjoyment of the Plaintiffs' premises, I think I am bound… to presume a legal origin and continuance to that fact.”
The fact that Plaintiff’s predecessors first affixed the signs suggests an easement.
On the objection that the easement related not to the tenement, but to the business of the occupant of the tenement, that argument is unrealistic: “the occupant only uses the house for the business, and therefore in some manner (direct or indirect) an easement is more or less connected with the mode in which the occupant of the house uses it.”
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 (5 pages) |
Land Law | Easements Notes (48 pages) |