Key Facts
- •Neighbouring landowners, Mr Weaver and Ms Smith, dispute the extent of a right of way granted in a 2015 deed.
- •The deed, drafted by Mr. Anderson, grants Mr. Weaver access from his property (Cwmclydach) to an accessway on Ms. Smith's property (Blaenclydach).
- •The dispute centers on whether the right of way extends to the public highway or stops short of it.
- •Mr. Weaver claims the deed should be interpreted to include access to the highway, or rectified if necessary.
- •The deed includes a plan showing the accessway's approximate route, marked by points A, B, and C.
- •Point A is located on Ms. Smith's yard, some distance from the highway.
Legal Principles
Contract interpretation focuses on the intention of the parties as understood by a reasonable person with all available background knowledge.
ABC Electrification Limited v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 1645
Registered land documents are interpreted primarily based on their registered terms; reliance on extrinsic evidence is limited.
Cherry Tree Investments v Landmain Ltd [2013] Ch 305; British Malleable Iron v Revelan (IOM) Ltd [2013] EWHC 1954
Rectification of a contract requires proof of a common continuing intention, outward expression of accord, continuing intention at execution, and a mistake causing the instrument to not reflect that intention.
Swainland Builders Ltd v. Freehold Properties Ltd [2002] 2 EGLR 71; FSHC Group Holdings Ltd v. Glas Trust Corp Ltd [2020] Ch 365
Outcomes
The claim succeeds.
The court finds that a reasonable reader of the deed would understand the right of way to extend to the highway, considering the deed's language and the physical features of the land. Even if the deed is not so interpreted, rectification is warranted given the parties’ common intention.