Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Moody v Steggles

[1879] 12 Ch D 261

Case summary last updated at 08/01/2020 15:52 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Moody v Steggles

P had put a sign for his pub on D’s wall for 40-50 years. Fry J ruled that this was an easement. 
Fry J: 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 P’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.” 

Moody v Steggles crops up in following areas of law