fbpx

Lordship of the Manor Almost Scuppers Residential Development

14th May 2020 By

Lordships of the manor, whilst sounding grand, are often viewed as arcane titles with little real significance in terms of property rights. However, that is not always so and, in one High Court case, a lordship which was bought for just £100 almost proved a fatal stumbling block to a proposed residential development.

As lords of the manor – a title they had acquired from their father, who bought it in the 1960s – a brother and sister owned the freehold of a scenic common. They grew concerned after the owner of a house which adjoined the common was granted planning permission to knock it down and erect four terraced houses in its place.

They argued that the boundary of the proposed development would encroach onto the common. They accepted that the house owner had a right of way over a rough track, which crossed the common, in order to gain access to her property. They argued, however, that that right was limited to the use of a single dwelling and that increased traffic generated by the development would damage the track.

In resolving the boundary issue, the Court considered ordnance survey maps, title deeds and plans of the area, some of which dated back well over a century. It found on the evidence that the correct boundary was in the position contended for by the house owner and that the development would thus not encroach onto the common.

Turning to the right of way issue, the Court found that the house owner’s plans would not involve a radical alteration of her property’s character or identity or an excessive use of the track. Construction vehicles had used the track in the past and such use would not entail a public nuisance or anything akin to it.

The house owner enjoyed an easement which allowed her to run a drain under the common and, given that it would have sufficient capacity to serve the sewerage needs of the new homes, the Court found that they too would benefit from that right. The Court’s ruling paved the way for the development to proceed.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Challenge to Will's Validity Rejected by High Court

12th April, 2024 By

The best way to ensure your assets will be distributed as you wish is to have your will professionally drafted by a qualified solicitor. In a recent case, a challenge to the validity of an elderly man's will was dismissed by the High Court. The man had previously made a will in 2011, leaving most of his estate equally to his three children. In 2018, by which time one of his sons had predeceased him, he made a further will, leaving the residue of his estate to his other son...

Defiance of Family Court Orders Will Always End Badly

10th April, 2024 By

Custodial sentences very rarely come into play in the family courts. Where there have been repeated breaches of court orders, however, judges may have little choice but to clamp down. This was illustrated in the High Court during committal proceedings that stemmed from a child custody dispute. The background to the case involved contested proceedings between the father and mother of a young child. These concluded with a court order establishing that the child – a daughter – would live with the mother. Three months later the daughter travelled with...

Claim for SDLT Relief on Annex Unsuccessful

8th April, 2024 By

When buying a property consisting of more than one residence, it may be possible to claim multiple dwellings relief (MDR) against Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT). However, there are certain conditions that must be met for an MDR claim to succeed, as a recent case illustrates. A property was purchased for £1.8 million. Prior to the purchase, the buyer had agreed with the seller that he would be allowed to carry out works to construct a self-contained annex at the property. The buyer's SDLT return included a claim for MDR...

Divorce – Alleged Bigamy Raised in Financial Remedies Dispute

5th April, 2024 By

The issue of bigamy and its potential impact on a person's ability to seek financial remedies in a divorce came under the legal spotlight recently. A husband made an application to strike out his wife's financial remedies claim on the basis that she had committed bigamy and deceived him into a marriage when she knew she was not free to marry. This deceit, he claimed, was so egregious that, as a matter of public policy, she should be debarred from pursuing any claim for financial remedies against him. The husband based...