Tehidy Minerals Ltd v Norman
Grazing rights could be acquired by the doctrine of lost modern grant, and were not abandoned merely because they were not used during a period of requisition.
Facts
Farmers grazed animals on downland in Cornwall belonging to Tehidy Minerals, for many years. During and after the Second World War, the land was requisitioned and used by the War Office, so the farmers could not use their rights. After the land was returned, the farmers resumed grazing through a grazing association. Tehidy Minerals argued that the farmers had never acquired rights, or had abandoned them.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that the farmers had acquired grazing rights under the doctrine of lost modern grant, and had not abandoned them. Buckley LJ said that, where there has been 20 years' uninterrupted enjoyment of a right as of right, the court will presume a lost modern grant, even if it is clear that no grant was in fact made. Abandonment of an easement is not to be lightly inferred, and the owner must have shown a fixed intention never to use the right again. Non use during the requisition, which was involuntary, did not show such an intention.
Related cases on easements
- Batchelor v Marlow [2001] EWCA Civ 1051, [2003] 1 WLR 764
- Copeland v Greenhalf [1952] Ch 488
- Dalton v Angus & Co (1881) 6 App Cas 740
- Re Ellenborough Park [1956] Ch 131
- Hill v Tupper (1863) 2 H & C 121
- Mills v Silver [1991] Ch 271
- Moncrieff v Jamieson [2007] UKHL 42, [2007] 1 WLR 2620
- Nickerson v Barraclough [1981] Ch 426
Studying land law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
