Servient owner meaning

This Checklist This Checklist outlines which provisions in a lease and other relevant associated documentation should be carefully examined to ascertain whether a right of light subsists. A right of light is an easement granting a landowner the entitlement to receive natural light through an opening in a building on its land. The owner of the land encumbered by that right (the 'servient Building') must not impede or disturb it without first obtaining consent. For any proposed development, it is therefore essential to identify neighbouring properties that could be enjoying a right of light (the 'dominant Building'). For further information on rights of light, see the following Practice Notes: Establishing and maintaining rights of light Rights of light—obstruction notices Rights of light claims Rights of light—insurance for developers Section 2 of the Prescription Act 1832 (PA 1832) requires actual enjoyment of light, meaning that those with less than a freehold interest can acquire a right of light in their own...

A property might: have the benefit of easements capable of exercise over other property, or be subject to easements exercised over the property for the benefit of other property. The land over which an easement is exercised is the servient land. The land enjoying the benefit of an easement is the dominant land. An easement may entitle the owner of the dominant land to: use the servient land (e.g. a right of way), or receive something from the servient land without interference or obstruction (e.g. a right of light, air or support). An easement may require the owner of the servient land to refrain from using the servient land in such a manner as to interfere with the easement, for example: by keeping any right of way over the servient land clear and unobstructed, or by not building on the servient land in such a way as to obstruct the light...

To establish that an easement has been given up, the servient owner must prove the dominant owner had a definite, settled intention never to: use the right again for themselves, or seek to transfer the right to any other person Abandonment where the original use has become impossible An easement may be treated as abandoned if it is tied to a particular use and that use can no longer occur (for instance, where the building benefiting from the easement has been demolished). For this to hold, the dominant land must have undergone a radical change in character or a change in identity. In line with the Court of Appeal’s ruling in McAdams Homes v Robinson, the court should also assess whether the new use of the redeveloped site would bring about a substantial increase in, or alteration to, the burden on the servient land. For additional guidance, see Practice Note: Easements—interpreting the use and extent. Where the modification to the dominant land...

The way land is used and occupied commonly relies on the land enjoying easements—for instance, a right of way or a right to drain. Such rights might be created by express grant, arise by long use (prescription), or be implied into the land’s original transfer. As ownership or patterns of use shift over time, it is often necessary to assess the character and scope of any easements that have been conferred or obtained. A buyer will want assurance that the easements benefiting the property are adequate for their particular requirements. Conversely, the owner of servient land may contend that a fresh or intensified exercise of an easement by the dominant tenement amounts to ‘excessive user’. There is no universal rule for construing easements; each dispute is determined on its own facts. That said, where an easement has been expressly granted, the primary reference point will always be the grant deed, which the court will read as a whole and in its proper context. Absent clear wording to the contrary, the...

This Practice Note considers who bears the burden of repairing and looking after land affected by easements, and who must meet the expense of ongoing upkeep, especially where no express provision allocates responsibility for carrying out works and/or funding repair and maintenance. It also addresses the position in the absence of any explicit agreement setting out duties or cost‑sharing. The focus is on responsibility where obligations are not expressly allocated between parties... Is there an obligation to repair? An easement confers a liberty to do something on another’s land, or to restrain something from being done; it is not a duty to act. In the Scottish decision of Moncrieff v Jamieson, Lord Scott observed that a right which can only be enjoyed if the servient owner undertakes positive acts cannot amount to an easement. Nonetheless, in day-to-day situations easements often entail action: a track may require resurfacing, or a drain may demand clearance. Routine use leads to wear, requiring periodic attention to keep the facility usable. Where an...

DATE [ date ] PARTIES [ name of owner of Dominant Land ], of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with registered office at OR [ address ] (Releasor) [ name of owner of Servient Land ], of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with registered office at OR [ address ] (Grantor) [ name of Mortgagee ], of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) having its registered office at [ address ] (Mortgagee) ...

Date [ date ] Parties [ full name of owner of dominant land or the profit ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) whose registered office is at ] [ address ] (Releasor) [ full name of owner of servient land ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) whose registered office is at ] [ address ] (Grantor) [ full name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) whose registered office is at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) Definitions For this Deed, the expressions below shall be construed as set out here: Grantor’s Land – the property described as [ description ] [ comprised in title number [ number ] OR comprised in a conveyance dated [ date ] made between [ details of parties ] OR shown [ edged...

This query asks whether the owner of the land (the servient owner) on which a septic tank currently sits, and across which a neighbour has acquired prescriptive drainage rights, is entitled to replace that tank with a modern treatment unit, and whether the neighbour benefiting from those rights (the dominant owner) can be obliged to contribute to the costs of installing and maintaining the replacement apparatus. Can the servient owner replace the tank? On the basis that the dominant owner holds a prescriptive right to drain into the septic tank (as stated), the initial issue is the servient owner’s entitlement to substitute the existing septic tank with a contemporary equivalent. Provided the works are organised so that the neighbour’s drainage rights are not hindered to an actionable extent, both during installation and thereafter, there is, in principle, no reason to object to the servient owner upgrading their own installation in this manner...

Easements—generally An easement is an intangible right enjoyed by the holder of a legal estate (dominant tenement) over land owned by another person (servient tenement), and it binds successors in title also. Easements are commonly positive, granting the dominant proprietor permission to go onto or use the servient land in some manner (e.g. a right of way). They may, however, be negative, as such restraining activities on the servient land and thereby conferring upon the dominant owner a right to receive something from that land (e.g. a right to light)...