Easements for storage and parking: Time for a rethink?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The interesting recent Queensland Supreme Court case Weigal v Toman has reopened the debate about the fundamental nature of an easement and in particular the status of easements providing for storage or the parking of vehicles. Case law differs in relation to whether these types of easements could be considered to satisfy the accepted Re Ellenborough Park indicia to be included within the category of valid easements. Case law suggests that easements that grant overly extensive rights to the owner of the dominant tenement take the easement beyond what is contemplated by an easement but authority differs as to where to draw that line. This article will discuss this unresolved controversy and seek to parse out the underlying principles behind this debate. It is suggested that conservatism derived from the numerus clausus principle has stymied acknowledgement of these types of easements. Rather than revealing some grant drawing upon issues of practicality and convenience that has tended to create inconsistency in judicial approaches to this issue. Although this may provide a just result in particular circumstances it does not assist the process of development of clear legal principle. This article will argue for a less stringent application of the numerus clausus principle that allows the creation of valid easements for parking and storage subject to criteria that acknowledge the fundamental nature of easements. This conclusion is bolstered by some recent and significant authorities that confirm this is the direction the law is taking.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProperty and security
Subtitle of host publicationSelected essays
EditorsL B Moses, B Edgeworth, C Sherry
Place of PublicationSydney
PublisherThomson Reuters (Prous Science)
Pages249-262
Number of pages14
ISBN (Print)9780455227573
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

case law
conservatism
grant
Supreme Court
Law
time

Cite this

Weir, M. (2010). Easements for storage and parking: Time for a rethink? In L. B. Moses, B. Edgeworth, & C. Sherry (Eds.), Property and security: Selected essays (pp. 249-262). Sydney: Thomson Reuters (Prous Science).
Weir, Michael. / Easements for storage and parking : Time for a rethink?. Property and security: Selected essays. editor / L B Moses ; B Edgeworth ; C Sherry. Sydney : Thomson Reuters (Prous Science), 2010. pp. 249-262
@inbook{766e1370d25e4360b15975962eca5358,
title = "Easements for storage and parking: Time for a rethink?",
abstract = "The interesting recent Queensland Supreme Court case Weigal v Toman has reopened the debate about the fundamental nature of an easement and in particular the status of easements providing for storage or the parking of vehicles. Case law differs in relation to whether these types of easements could be considered to satisfy the accepted Re Ellenborough Park indicia to be included within the category of valid easements. Case law suggests that easements that grant overly extensive rights to the owner of the dominant tenement take the easement beyond what is contemplated by an easement but authority differs as to where to draw that line. This article will discuss this unresolved controversy and seek to parse out the underlying principles behind this debate. It is suggested that conservatism derived from the numerus clausus principle has stymied acknowledgement of these types of easements. Rather than revealing some grant drawing upon issues of practicality and convenience that has tended to create inconsistency in judicial approaches to this issue. Although this may provide a just result in particular circumstances it does not assist the process of development of clear legal principle. This article will argue for a less stringent application of the numerus clausus principle that allows the creation of valid easements for parking and storage subject to criteria that acknowledge the fundamental nature of easements. This conclusion is bolstered by some recent and significant authorities that confirm this is the direction the law is taking.",
author = "Michael Weir",
year = "2010",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780455227573",
pages = "249--262",
editor = "Moses, {L B } and B Edgeworth and C Sherry",
booktitle = "Property and security",
publisher = "Thomson Reuters (Prous Science)",
address = "United States",

}

Weir, M 2010, Easements for storage and parking: Time for a rethink? in LB Moses, B Edgeworth & C Sherry (eds), Property and security: Selected essays. Thomson Reuters (Prous Science), Sydney, pp. 249-262.

Easements for storage and parking : Time for a rethink? / Weir, Michael.

Property and security: Selected essays. ed. / L B Moses; B Edgeworth; C Sherry. Sydney : Thomson Reuters (Prous Science), 2010. p. 249-262.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Easements for storage and parking

T2 - Time for a rethink?

AU - Weir, Michael

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - The interesting recent Queensland Supreme Court case Weigal v Toman has reopened the debate about the fundamental nature of an easement and in particular the status of easements providing for storage or the parking of vehicles. Case law differs in relation to whether these types of easements could be considered to satisfy the accepted Re Ellenborough Park indicia to be included within the category of valid easements. Case law suggests that easements that grant overly extensive rights to the owner of the dominant tenement take the easement beyond what is contemplated by an easement but authority differs as to where to draw that line. This article will discuss this unresolved controversy and seek to parse out the underlying principles behind this debate. It is suggested that conservatism derived from the numerus clausus principle has stymied acknowledgement of these types of easements. Rather than revealing some grant drawing upon issues of practicality and convenience that has tended to create inconsistency in judicial approaches to this issue. Although this may provide a just result in particular circumstances it does not assist the process of development of clear legal principle. This article will argue for a less stringent application of the numerus clausus principle that allows the creation of valid easements for parking and storage subject to criteria that acknowledge the fundamental nature of easements. This conclusion is bolstered by some recent and significant authorities that confirm this is the direction the law is taking.

AB - The interesting recent Queensland Supreme Court case Weigal v Toman has reopened the debate about the fundamental nature of an easement and in particular the status of easements providing for storage or the parking of vehicles. Case law differs in relation to whether these types of easements could be considered to satisfy the accepted Re Ellenborough Park indicia to be included within the category of valid easements. Case law suggests that easements that grant overly extensive rights to the owner of the dominant tenement take the easement beyond what is contemplated by an easement but authority differs as to where to draw that line. This article will discuss this unresolved controversy and seek to parse out the underlying principles behind this debate. It is suggested that conservatism derived from the numerus clausus principle has stymied acknowledgement of these types of easements. Rather than revealing some grant drawing upon issues of practicality and convenience that has tended to create inconsistency in judicial approaches to this issue. Although this may provide a just result in particular circumstances it does not assist the process of development of clear legal principle. This article will argue for a less stringent application of the numerus clausus principle that allows the creation of valid easements for parking and storage subject to criteria that acknowledge the fundamental nature of easements. This conclusion is bolstered by some recent and significant authorities that confirm this is the direction the law is taking.

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780455227573

SP - 249

EP - 262

BT - Property and security

A2 - Moses, L B

A2 - Edgeworth, B

A2 - Sherry, C

PB - Thomson Reuters (Prous Science)

CY - Sydney

ER -

Weir M. Easements for storage and parking: Time for a rethink? In Moses LB, Edgeworth B, Sherry C, editors, Property and security: Selected essays. Sydney: Thomson Reuters (Prous Science). 2010. p. 249-262