Bee v Thompson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Lloyd |
| Judgment Date | 27 April 2009 |
| Neutral Citation | [2009] EWCA Civ 496,[2009] EWCA Civ 1212 |
| Docket Number | Case No: A3/2008/2996 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 27 April 2009 |
BEE & ANR
Appellant
and
Thompson
Respondent
Before:
Lord Justice Lloyd
Case No: A3/2008/2996
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE COURT
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE KAYE QC)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr J Thom QC (instructed by Messrs Hodgson and Angus) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
THE RESPONDENT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.
Lord Justice Lloyd:
1
I have some sympathy with the judge, but despite what Thomas LJ said, it seems to me that this is a case that does get over the threshold on both grounds. So I will propose to grant permission to appeal on both the issue of construction and the issue of excessive user.
2
I...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
6 cases
-
Zoe Claire Bucknell v Alchemy Estates (Holywell) Ltd
...For these reasons I would affirm the judge's decision of the subsidiary question and the relief that he granted in respect of it.” 94 In Bee v Thompson [2010] Ch 412, a testatrix by her will gave a house and garden to the first claimant, “subject nevertheless to a right of way as existing ......
-
Britvic Plc v Britvic Pensions Ltd
...in relation to the construction of the 2007 Rules. Mr Bryant cites the case of Thompson v Bee [2009] EWCA Civ 1212, reported at [2010] Ch 412. Mr Bryant submits that all of these documents are part of the demerger and establishment of the Britvic Pension Plan; without the transfer deeds, th......
-
Andrew David Scott Walby and Another v Malcolm Seamus Scott Walby and Another
...applied to a will and had been applied in earlier cases which were referred to. This decision was approved by the Court of Appeal in Bee v Thompson [2010] Ch 412 at [31], although that case turned on the express terms of the will rather than any implied grant. There is possibly a difference......
-
Austin v Rentrezi 2 Limited
...the right 27 28 Grinskis v La Hood [1971] NZLR 502 (SC) and see Handford v Kokomoko Farms Ltd [2010] 11 NZCPR 171 (HC); Bee v Thompson [2009] EWCA Civ 1212 Hinde McMorland & Sim Land Law in New Zealand, above n 5 at [16.06], note 1. of way in issue was intended to provide access to lots 3, ......
Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
-
Ensure That A Right Of Way Fits The Bill
...to grant a right of way think very carefully as to whether you want to impose any restrictions as to use. Law: Bee –v- Thompson [2009] EWCA Civ 1212 This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to Law-Now inf......