White and Another v Richards
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 March 1993 |
| Date | 12 March 1993 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Nourse, Lord Justice Stuart-Smith and Lord Justice Mann
Right of way - size restriction
A right of passage along a track to "pass and repass on foot and with or without motor vehicles" was to be restricted by the physical characteristics of the track with the result that its use by unauthorised vehicles or its excessive use by authorised vehicles was unlawful.
However, the grant of the right in such terms permitted the use of the track by horses, ridden or led, and included the right to lead, but not to drive, cows and other animals.
The Court of Appeal so held in allowing to a minimal extent an appeal by the defendant, Mr Rodney Richards, from the judgment of Judge Gareth Edwards, QC, given in Warrington County Court in September 1991 granting the plaintiffs, Mr and Mrs William White, an injunction limiting the defendant's use of his right of way over their land and awarding them damages for trespass of £2,670.
Mr William Ainger for the the defendant; Mr Simon Stirling for the plaintiffs.
LORD JUSTICE NOURSE said that the dispute was about a private right of way created by express grant.
The main question was whether a right of passage with motor vehicles, unrestricted in its terms, was nevertheless restricted by the physical characteristics of the way.
Further questions related to the excessive use of the vehicular right and as to the extent of the right of passage with animals.
The nature and extent of such a right depended on the intention of the parties as ascertained from the words of the grant read in the light of the surrounding circumstances.
The physical characteristics of the way were sometimes decisive but the popularisation of the internal combustion engine and increases in commercial and residential development had united to give rise to frequent disputes over vehicular rights of way.
The unlawful use of such a right might consist either in its use by unauthorised vehicles or excessive use by authorised vehicles.
The defendant, on purchasing 22 acres of agricultural land at Glazebrook, Warrington, became entitled under a 1987 deed of conveyance to the benefit of a right "at all times hereafter to pass and repass on foot and with or without motor vehicles" along some 250 metres of track, 2.7 metres wide, belonging to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' bungalow faced that track and was no more than nine feet away from it.
Difficulties arose...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dewan and Others v Lewis
...more onerous right than a way with horses and carts (per Denning MR at 553E, Harman LJ at 557G to 558A, Davies LJ at 563G to 564A). iii) White v Richards (1993) 68 P& CR105 in which an express grant of a right of way “on foot and with or without vehicles” permitted use by horses whether rid......
-
Wood and Another v Waddington
...always include a footway. It was constructed for that purpose, and used for that purpose." (Emphasis added) 75 In White v Richards (1993) 68 P & CR 105 this court was concerned with a right: "to pass and repass on foot and with or without vehicles over and along the track coloured brown…" 7......
-
Perlman v Rayden
...National Omnibus Co Ltd [1993] 1 Ch 190, St Edmundsbury and Ipswich Diocesan Board of Finance v Clark (No 2) and White v Richards [1993] 68 P&CR 105, the physical circumstances did so operate. But, by contrast, in Bulstrode v Lambert [1953] 1 WLR 1064, Keefe v Amor [1965] 1 QB 234 and Charl......
-
Zoe Claire Bucknell v Alchemy Estates (Holywell) Ltd
...at a later time. That is not what the grant says and it is not what it means.” 114 This can be compared with White v Richards (1993) 68 P & CR 105, where there was the reservation of a right of way “on foot and with or without motor vehicles over and along the track coloured brown on the pl......
-
Table of Cases
...Ltd [1937] Ch 610, [1938] Ch 351, CA 246 White v Grand Hotel, Eastbourne [1913] 1 Ch 113 20 White v Richards (1993) 68 P & CR 105, [1993] RTR 318, [1993] NPC 41, CA 30 Whiting’s Application, Re (1989) 58 P & CR 321, LT 254 Wickenden v Webster (1856) 25 LJ QB 264 280 Wildtree Hotels ......
-
Particular Easements and Examples of Analogous Remedies of Relevance to Development
...at the time of the grant then there may be scope for an implied grant of access to that other land. Although the rule in Harris v 7 (1993) 68 P & CR 105. The case raised a subsidiary issue involving the extent of the right of passage with animals. The Court of Appeal ruled that the grant in......