Access – the rights and wrongs

30 Jan 2019

The Court of Appeal decision in Gore v Naheed and Another [2017] EWCA Civ 369 provided a helpful reminder that, generally, a right granted in favour of one parcel of land will not benefit another parcel of land, even if both pieces are owned by the same person. 


The facts

Mr Gore owned a property known as The Granary.  The Granary was accessed via a driveway.  The right over the driveway in favour of The Granary was as follows "the right with or without horses or other animals carts or wagons laden or unladen to go and return along and over the private entrance road or way coloured yellow on the said plan for all purposes connected with the use and occupation of the said granary but not further or otherwise."

The area coloured yellow on the plan included an area on which a garage had been built in 1994. When Mr Gore purchased The Granary, he also purchased the garage land.  There was not an express right of way to the garage land over the driveway. 

The Naheeds owned a shop which backed onto the driveway.  When deliveries were made to the shop, the delivery vehicle would park and unload on the driveway.   As the driveway was narrow, Mr Gore could not access his garage at these times. 

Mr Gore therefore claimed against the Naheeds for obstructing his right of way.  The Naheeds said that the right of way did not benefit the garage land and that it only benefitted The Granary.

The decision

The Court of Appeal decided that, in this case, as the garage was used in conjunction with The Granary, the right of way also extended to the garage.  The Court said that if the garage was used independently of the Granary (for example, if the garage was let to a third party, or was sold off), then the garage would no longer have a right of way over the driveway.

The point

The decision in this case isn’t new law, but it is a helpful reminder that the extent of an express right over land will always depend on the facts.  As a result it is very dangerous to rely on a right, unless it very clearly sets out that it benefits the additional land.  In the majority of cases insurance will be advisable.  For more information about indemnity insurance, see our recent article here.


Further reading

Commercial landlords face extended restrictions

Blog, Legal Updates
Landlords take another hit as tenants’ protection mandated to last two years; Lawrence Morley takes a look
Read more Read

New Homes Quality Code – consultation under way

Blog, Legal Updates
Now is the time for housing developers to contribute to the discussion about new quality code
Read more Read

Is changing terms of employment about to become more difficult?

Employers beware. It may become more difficult to change terms of employment through the process of dismissal and re-engagement or “fire and rehire”.
Read more Read

Is the menopause really a business issue?

Abigail Maino explores the extent to which employers should be supporting employees who may be struggling with symptoms of the menopause
Read more Read
  • Brighton Office

    1 Jubilee Street


    East Sussex

    BN1 1GE

  • Gatwick Office

    Griffin House

    135 High Street


    West Sussex

    RH10 1DQ

  • Guildford Office

    Wonersh House

    The Guildway

    Old Portsmouth Road



    GU3 1LR

  • Horsham Office

    Ridgeland House

    15 Carfax


    West Sussex

    RH12 1DY

  • London Office

    6 New Street Square

    New Fetter Lane


    EC4A 3BF

  • Get in touch