xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Copeland v Greenhalf [1952] Ch 488

Country:
United Kingdom
  • For fifty years Defendant had left vehicles on Plaintiff’s land and Plaintiff sought to restrain him from doing so.

  • Defendant claimed prescriptive easement.

  • The court denied an easement since the right exercised and claimed was too extensive to constitute an easement in law, as it amounted practically to a claim to the whole beneficial use of the land over which it had been exercised. 

Upjohn J

  • Because of the extent of the supposed right (right to leave possessions there for an indeterminate period anywhere on the land), it cannot come within easement.

  • In reality, beneficial use/joint use is claimed, and Defendant would have to argue for possession through adverse possession if he seeks to establish a right of this magnitude.

  • The right claimed was described as having a problem of “vagueness”. 

Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch