Couche v Adams and Ors [2002] NSWSC 27

Reported Decision : (2002) NSW ConvR 56-019

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Couche v Adams and Ors [2002] NSWSC 27 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3556/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 29 & 30 January, 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 31 January 2002

James Clinton Couche - Plaintiff, (1) First Cross Defendant, (2) Second Cross Defendant Phillip Andrew Hedley Adams - First Defendant, (1) First Cross Claimant, (2) First Cross Claimant PARTIES : Owners Corporation Strata Scheme 35387B - Second Defendant, (1) Second Cross Claimant, (2) Second Cross Claimant Anna Alice Couche - (1) Second Cross Defendant Muriel Nancy Couche - (1) Third Cross Defendant Registrar General of New South Wales - (2) First Cross Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Palmer J

V.A. Bizannes (Sol.) - Plaintiff COUNSEL : J.B. Maston - First Defendant P.B. Walsh - Registrar-General Victor A. Bizannes - Plaintiff SOLICITORS : Marsdens - First Defendant Solicitor for the Registrar-General CATCHWORDS : EASEMENT AND RIGHTS OF WAY - ABANDONMENT - Right of way appurtenant to terrace houses in Paddington granted in 1921 - right of way enclosed by brick wall - whether sufficient evidence from which inference could be drawn that dominant owners intended to abandon right of way - RIGHT OF WAY - EXTINGUISHMENT - Whether right of way could be deemed obsolete so as to justify extinguishment under s.89(1)(a) Conveyancing Act - rear access to terrace houses in inner city suburb to be ordinarily regarded as providing a continuing benefit to dominant owners of right of way - no justification for extinguishment - RIGHT OF WAY - MODIFICATION - Where owner of servient tenement appropriates right of way for sole access to front door of house without seeking extinguishment of right way, subsequent inconvenience to owner of house arising from use of right of way by dominant owners cannot justify modification of right of way under s.89(1) so as to restrict free use by dominant owners. LEGISLATION CITED : Conveyancing Act, 1919 - s.89(1) Real Property Act, 1900 - s.122 - Butler v Muddle (1995) 6 BPR 13984 - Gotobed v Pridmore [1970] 115 Sol Jo 78 CASES CITED : - Tehidy Minerals Ltd v Norman [1971] 2 QB 528 - Treweeke v 36 Wolseley Road Pty Ltd (1973) 128 CLR 274 - Ward v Ward (1852) 7 Ex 838 [155 ER 1189] DECISION : Declaration that right of way still in existence; modification of right of way by extinguishment of that part which is unnecessary to provide access to dominant tenements.