The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has granted a couple's application to register a right of way over...
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has granted a couple's application to register a right of way over a small triangle of land belonging to a neighbouring property owner, finding that they and their tenants had crossed it as of right for at least 20 years.
The couple owned three properties in the same neighbourhood which they rented out to tenants. One of the properties had use of a parking space reached via an access road. In 2023, a company that had recently bought properties nearby was granted planning permission to build two houses that would cover a small triangular piece of land next to the access road. The couple applied for registration of a right of way over the triangle, claiming that they and their tenants had for more than 20 years needed to pass over it to access the parking space and the car park serving their other properties, and that they had done so openly, without force and without permission. The company disputed that they had acquired the right.
The husband stated that, while the house that had use of the parking space was being built, he had been on site almost every day, and he had attended regularly since the house had been completed. He said that it was not possible to drive in or out without crossing the triangle, and that vehicles parked in a parking area belonging to the company did not extend onto the triangle. A current and former tenant of the couple gave evidence in support of their application.
The company's director, the tenant of its property, and an architect it had engaged to carry out the project that involved building on the triangle gave evidence that vehicles using the company's parking area needed to encroach onto the triangle. One of the company's predecessors in title, who had co-owned the properties with his father, accepted that there had been no agreement between his father and the husband for use of the triangle: it was his understanding that his father had tolerated use of it.
After considering the witness evidence, and having had the benefit of a site visit, the FTT came to the firm conclusion that, on the balance of probabilities, cars would have driven over the triangle to access both the parking space and the car park serving the couple's other properties. There was space for cars parked on the company's parking area to extend slightly beyond it without blocking the triangle. The couple's and their tenants' use of the triangle would have been apparent to the properties' previous owners.
The FTT found that the couple and their tenants had crossed the triangle as of right for the requisite 20 years. It would have been apparent to the previous owners that a right was being asserted, and they had done nothing that would have interfered with the acquisition of a right of way. The FTT directed the Chief Land Registrar to give effect to the couple's application.