Pettey v Parsons
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1914 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
62 cases
-
Moncrieff v Jamieson and Others
...foot wide domestic driveway would not constitute an actionable interference with a right of way over the driveway (see Pettey v Parsons [1914] 2 Ch 653 and Celsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd [1985] 1 WLR 204). These principles are well exemplified by the English case of Saint v Jenne......
-
Perlman v Rayden
...to create and use a new front door, even if that would involve the destruction of part of the planting area. 36 In Pettey v. Parsons [1914] 2 Ch 653 at page 667 Swinfen Eady LJ confirmed that it is a question of construction in every case whether a right of way gives access to every part of......
-
Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd v MCST Plan No 301
...Company v British and French Trust Corporation, Limited [1939] AC 1 (refd) Peacock v Custins [2002] 1 WLR 1815 (refd) Pettey v Parsons [1914] 2 Ch 653 (refd) Republic of India v India Steamship Co Ltd [1993] AC 410 (refd) Williams v James (1867) LR 2 CP 577 (refd) Yat Tung Investment Co Ltd......
-
Peter Bramwell and Others v Peter Robinson
...referred to was the decision of Nicholas Strauss QC in Owers v Bailey [2006] AER (D) 106 (Sep) which contains the following: 63. In Pettey v. Parsons [1914] 2 Ch. 653, the Court of Appeal held that the erection of a gate across the right of way was not necessarily a sufficiently substantial......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Particular Easements and Examples of Analogous Remedies of Relevance to Development
...[2008] 4 All ER 752 at [26], [32] and [123]. 20 Todrick v Western National Omnibus Co Ltd [1934] 1 Ch 561 at 572–573. 21 Petty v Parsons [1914] 2 Ch 653 at 663–634, 667 and 669. 22 Petty v Parsons [1914] 2 Ch 653 at 663, 667 and 669. In this case, the Court of Appeal approved of the erectio......