Bryant v Foot

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of the Queen's Bench
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
25 cases
  • Bryant v Foot
    • United Kingdom
    • Exchequer
    • Invalid date
  • Odey v Barber
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 29 November 2006
    ...acquisition of easements by prescription, he explained (with my emphasis added) that: “As Cockburn C.J. observed [in Bryant v FootELR (1867) LR 2 QB 161, 181], the jury were instructed that if there was no evidence absolutely inconsistent with there having been immemorial user or a lost mod......
  • Bakewell Management Ltd v Brandwood and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 1 April 2004
    ...clam, nec precario: not by force, by stealth or with permission – he could have objected to at any time. 8 As Cockburn CJ explained in Bryant v Foot (1867) LR 2 QB 161, 180–181, it is to be presumed from a period of 20 years' user, and the lack of evidence inconsistent with there having be......
  • Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 24 February 2005
    ...Hoffmann observed, was unknown in 1189, and unlawful for some centuries thereafter (p357B). The only example given by Lord Hoffmann ( Bryant v Foot LR2 QB 161) was about customary charges for marriage lxix Per Lord Denning MR, Corpus Christi College v Gloucestershire CC [1983] 1 QB 360, 36......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The future of prescriptive easements in Australia and England.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 31 Nbr. 1, April 2007
    • 1 April 2007
    ...of the various stages in which juries were instructed to assume the existence of a lost deed of modern grant: see Bryant v Foot (1867) LR 2 QB 161, 181 (Cockburn C J); Dalton v Angus (1881) 6 App Cas 780, 812-13 (Lord Blackburn); Getzler, above n 21, (61) A-G (UK) v Simpson [1901] 2 Ch 671,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT