In Grigsby v Melville ([1974] 1 WLR 80, CA (Eng)) a property in single ownership had been divided into two semi-detached properties and each of these was sold to a separate buyer (P and D respectively). The entrance to the cellar under P’s property was on D’s land. The conveyance to P excepted and reserved ‘such rights and easements or quasi-rights and easements as may be enjoyed with the adjoining property’.
P learned that D was using it and sought an injunction to restrain what he alleged to be a trespass. D argued: (i) that the cellar had been conveyed to her not P; or (ii) that she enjoyed an easement allowing her to use the cellar.
The Court of Appeal held that P’s ownership of his land included the cellar underneath it. Stamp LJ said: ‘It is, however, axiomatic that a conveyance of land carries with it all that is beneath the surface’ (at 85). It was ultimately a matter of the construction of the conveyance but nothing in the conveyance pointed to any other conclusion than that P’s ownership included the cellar.
The Court of Appeal saw nothing on the facts of the case that would point to D’s enjoyment of an implied easement to use the cellar. The easement issue was explored in greater detail in the first instance judgment.
Michael Lower
