Homeowner allowed to access next door after neighbours' lose appeal

Thursday 25 August 2022

A homeowner in Grouville will be allowed to enter an area of his neighbours’ land to access a gable end of his property after senior judges rejected an appeal.

The Royal Court judged in March that a Jean Pierre Vernon Falle could put up scaffolding on the end of his bungalow, La Côte, despite his neighbours refusing access up to now.

This was so he could replace the outer leaf of his existing northern gable wall with bricks and/or stone, as he was obliged to under a clause in the original deeds when the house was built in the mid 80s.

However, after an earlier dispute about work Mr Falle had carried out at La Côte, neighbours Michael Charles Russell and Karen Anne Russel, did not permit him to access their property, Beach House.

They also said that they had no intention of enforcing the provision that the northern gable of La Côte should be constructed in bricks and/or stone (“clause 13” of Mr Falle’s deeds). 

The decision of the Royal Court in March is explained here.

Appealing that decision, Mr and Mrs Russell argued that merely ‘facing’ the northern gable of La Cȏte with bricks and/stones would not comply with clause 13, and that the following clause giving him access to Beach House had, in effect, been extinguished by the initial decision to build in breeze block and render.

They also argued that the Royal Court had not fully considered the impact of its decision on them, and it had failed to identify - sufficiently or at all - the presumed intention of the parties when interpreting the various clauses of the property contract. 

However, the Court of Appeal decided to uphold the judgment of the Royal Court and dismiss the appeal.  

George Bompass, who was sitting with Helen Mountfield and Jeremy Storey, concluded: “The consequence [of the dismissal] is that Mr Falle has the right to enter the ‘access area’ of Beach House for the purpose of erecting scaffolding for the period reasonably required to undertake works so as to put the northern gable in conformity with clause 13.  

“We note that, on our interpretation of clause 13, facing the wall with brick slips would suffice to comply with the clause, which may minimise the work required and inconvenience likely to be caused to Mr and Mrs Russell. 

The judges added: “We have seen recent photographs which show a small new structure erected by Mr and Mrs Russell on the access area required for the proposed works.  

“[Counsel for Mr and Mrs Russell] maintained that even if the appeal was dismissed, Mr and Mrs Russell would be entitled to exercise their droit de jointure [right to join] under clause 13.  

“However, when pressed by all three members of the court, he accepted that the current structure would not constitute any droit de jointure as it was not joined to La Cȏte.  

“If this structure prevents Mr Falle’s exercise of his clause 14 access right, it will need to be removed beforehand.

“If it is not, Mr Falle may have to seek injunctive relief from the Royal Court. 

“We express the strong hope that this will not be necessary – such a course would no doubt extend the period of inconvenience for both parties.”