Easement: View

Denham

X moves into a house which was advertised with a sea view several years ago - over the course of time trees and bushes grew obstructing that view. This growth was at the bottom of someones garden postioned on derelict land. X paid Y to chop it.... But y chops a bit more than expected by trimming 2 trees not commissioned to chop from leaving some unclean branch cuts - kinda on the end of the boundary of zs land at the bottom of their garden.
The view is much better now so issue almost resolved but not quite. The neighbours are away (z) and a bit anal and barking mad so x descided to get it done while they were away and when x was on holidays.
Also the neighbour z has planted new apple trees which are obstructing that view at the end of xs garden. There are three very small branches in that view which have grown over the the last 2 years - is it legal for them to plant those apple trees their? Does x have an easement - does z have any recourse.... x just wants his view that he paid for when he rented the property! But y trimmed two trees he wasnt instructed to quite ppossibly on zs land and now x wants to cut the small apple tree branch blocking his view but wonders if he should as y cut to much! z is a bit annoyed that trees on at the tip of her boundary garden were trimmed without permission and states x can not trim apple the new apple trees on her land blocking xs view.
Please advise the parties....

Sounds like a fe1 question

234

X would be advised to consult a solicitor immediately. How is X claiming that this easement arose? Where was the grant (implied or express)? Or was there perscription? X almost certainly had no right to cut trees on his neighbours property. X should tread very carefully.

Denham

234 wrote: »

X would be advised to consult a solicitor immediately. How is X claiming that this easement arose? Where was the grant (implied or express)? Or was there perscription? X almost certainly had no right to cut trees on his neighbours property. X should tread very carefully.

Relax ffs its a hypothetical question. These are small trim and drops on derelict land that nobody cares for and has left to grow obstructibng sea views... the only thing z doesnt like is it gives them less privacy but its not on their land... interesting point though - what takes precedence - a view addvertised in the letting or privacy from trees not on your land!
Also, these are 2 very small trees/ bushes behind big trees - so its not really a case of privacy or light really just a sea view.

Issues: Easements
Right to view
Right to privacy
Right to light
Derrelict land
New baby apple trees blocking view
Old established derelict bushes and overgrowth
Breach of contract between person and gardener
Implied easements
Express easements
Boundary lines

Peregrinus

The fact that a house is advertised as having a view creates no rights at all (except possibly against the advertiser if in fact the house has no view). It certainly doesn't create a right enforceable against neighbours that any view which is there will be maintained indefinitely. The amount of additional rent which X is prepared to pay for a house with a view should reflect the possiblity that the view will not be there forever. Besides, if X is only renting the house and if, in X's view, the house with the impaired view is no longer worth the rent, X has an obvious recourse; give notice.

In the scenario you outline X has no right either to trim the apple trees in Z's garden, or to require Z to trim them. X is entirely reliant on Z's goodwill, and the previous tactic of waiting until Z was away in order to do something which it was anticipated that Z would be unhappy about was ill-judged, since it was highly likely to foster the opposite of goodwill on Z's part.

234

Not matter what incorporeal right you might have, you never have a right to enter onto anybody else's property to cut trees. The fact that the land was derelict does not stop it from being somebody's property. You can acquire an easement to a view through long use or prescription. You never said that light was an issue. The fact that the advertisement said something makes no difference to your rights. It is only relevant to the possibility of misrepresentation in contract or negligent misstatement in tort.

In summary, X sounds like the worst sort of neighbour who thinks he can do whatever he wants. He has acted illegally in several instances, had possibly exposed himself to criminal damage charges. He should contact his neighbours and apologise immediately and offer to pay for the cost of replacing the trees and bushes that he unlawfully damaged.

Denham

234 wrote: »

Not matter what incorporeal right you might have, you never have a right to enter onto anybody else's property to cut trees. The fact that the land was derelict does not stop it from being somebody's property. You can acquire an easement to a view through long use or prescription. You never said that light was an issue. The fact that the advertisement said something makes no difference to your rights. It is only relevant to the possibility of misrepresentation in contract or negligent misstatement in tort.

In summary, X sounds like the worst sort of neighbour who thinks he can do whatever he wants. He has acted illegally in several instances, had possibly exposed himself to criminal damage charges. He should contact his neighbours and apologise immediately and offer to pay for the cost of replacing the trees and bushes that he unlawfully damaged.

But x did ask z to trim two trees and 1 bush and he trimmed two more on a boundary line which is debatable... so thats really the annoying part.... x is now waitibng from a resonse from z as to who contarcted the other two - perhaps it was the tenants of ys adjoining rental property....

The land entered upon is a nice site which has become completely over grown and the owners have been away for years -they dont care as long as its a trim.... They have let their growth block xs view beacuse they couldnt be assed to maintain it.... but the issue is y has less privacy but the trimming was not on their land or their property and they are the ones upset (1 foot passed steep gradient boundary line on ys land).... I think your all missing the point... y is upset but its not ys land!!!! the real owner of the site doesnt give a sh*t. Its passed the boundary line of ys land and on A's land.... but as i said before a is letting it run wild.... y is a control freak and its not ys land...
who has precedence xs view or ys slight ever so slight lack of privacy....
Also it seems unfair that a person with a 2 acre garden decides to plant two of about 6 apple trees at the very corner of their garden blocking xs view which has been their for years... these are 2 yrs old apple trees which could be positioned three inches to the left... apologies dont think i explained the sceanario i had envisaged with the requisite clarity required

you dont own passed your boubndary line whether its 1cm or 1m

eb0ny

Hi guys, I'm wondering if anyone could help me out. I'm studying easements but don't know how to answer a problem question on it. Could someone please give me any tips and if it was clearly a hypothetical case would I have to mention the 2009 Act as well? So confused. I'd really appreciate any help I can get


Angela has been using a path near her house since 1982, which gets her to work 20 minutes quicker than using the road. However, she is only person using the path and only uses it during summer as it is too wet in winter. She has recently seen a sign being placed at the front of the path advertising new
homes for sale. At the edge of the site, there is a sign showing a five storey block of flats which will overlook her own garden and obscure her view of Galway Bay. There seems to be a plan to remove the house adjoining hers to create an entrance to this new estate. Advise Angela.

Tom Young

See we don't provide a homework service here either ...

Starting point - what is an easement? ...

eb0ny

cheers tom

loremolis

Tom Young wrote: »

See we don't provide a homework service here either ...

Starting point - what is an easement? ...

Related question, not homework;

What is the difference between an easement and a wayleave?

Tom Young

A wayleave is the consent in writing that allows a party to carry out work on privately- owned land.

An easement is best described as a right of use over the property of another. Traditionally the permitted kinds of uses were limited, the most important being rights of way and rights concerning the movement or flow of water.

loremolis

Tom Young wrote: »

A wayleave is the consent in writing that allows a party to carry out work on privately- owned land.

An easement is best described as a right of use over the property of another. Traditionally the permitted kinds of uses were limited, the most important being rights of way and rights concerning the movement or flow of water.

If a wayleave is consent given to carry out works on privately owned land, is it more akin to a contract or a licence i.e an agreement between two parties?

If a wayleave includes for the retention of the works in perpetuity and refers to the successors and assigns of the parties involved, does that make it like an easement, apart from the fact that there may not be two adjoining properties involved?

Tom Young

Question 1. it's called a wayleave, and that's its legal name - I'm not setting out to come across as a smart Alec;

Question 2. No it doesn't. The two are similar in a practical sense, but different.

Example: right to walk across land via right of way ius spatiendi/manendi may be an easement; right to fish; cut turf, etc.

Wayleave - telephones; gas; electricity; essential service. License like, but within strict confines and usually much more limited.

Hope this helps.

loremolis

Tom Young wrote: »

Question 1. it's called a wayleave, and that's its legal name - I'm not setting out to come across as a smart Alec;

Question 2. No it doesn't. The two are similar in a practical sense, but different.

Example: right to walk across land via right of way ius spatiendi/manendi may be an easement; right to fish; cut turf, etc.

Wayleave - telephones; gas; electricity; essential service. License like, but within strict confines and usually much more limited.

Hope this helps.

Yes it does, thanks.