Signs of the Times: Two recent Court of Appeal cases on the importance of signage on private property

In this article for Property Law Journal, Lucy McCormick considers the following cases:

• Winterburn v Bennett [2016] EWCA Civ 482, in which it was found that a sign on land indicating that a certain activity is prohibited is sufficient to render that activity “contentious”, and thus prevent an easement from prescription from arising;
• Taylor v English Heritage [2016] EWCA Civ 448, a second Court of Appeal decision in the same month, in which it was held that English Heritage was negligent in not erecting a sign warning of the risk of falling into a moat. In the unusual circumstances of the case, the risk was not an “obvious danger” and so should have been signed.

To read the article in full, please click here (reproduced by kind permission).

Lucy McCormick analyses two recent Court of Appeal cases that emphasise the importance of signage on private property

In a landmark easement decision, the Court of Appeal has recently given judgment in Winterburn v Bennett [2016]. The court held that a sign on land indicating that a certain activity is prohibited is sufficient to render that activity ‘contentious’, and thus prevent an easement from prescription from arising. It will now be significantly easier for landowners to protect their rights.