Jaggard v Sawyer [1995]

336 words (1 pages) Case Summary in Cases

12/10/18 Cases Reference this

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Parallelewelten.net.

If you would like to view samples of the work produced by our academic writers please click here.

Jaggard v Sawyer [1995] 1 W.LR. 269



The defendant was subject to a restrictive covenant requiring them to leave a private road clear for use. They breached this covenant by building a house and beginning to build access to that house partially on the road. The claimant sought an injunction for the cessation of the construction work and to bar the occupiers of the new house from using the road. The judge at first instance granted damages in lieu of an injunction.


The case of Shelfer v City of London Electric Lightingheld that damages in lieu of an injunction should be granted if four conditions are satisfied: the damage to the claimant is small, is capable of monetary valuation, can be compensated by a small money-payment, and it would be oppressive to impose an injunction on the defendant. This is sometimes referred to as the ‘working rule’.

The issue in this case was whether the working rule was satisfied and the meaning of ‘oppressive’.


The Court of Appeal upheld the grant of damages in lieu of an injunction.

The Court stressed that injunctions should be the normal remedy in a restrictive covenant case unless the four conditions are made out. They noted that the evaluation of whether an injunction would be oppressive to the defendant should not slip into a ‘balance of convenience’ style test: it is a higher threshold. Relevant factors to consider when evaluating the oppressiveness of an injunction include whether the claimant could have sought an injunction at an earlier, more convenient stage and whether the defendant acted with blatant and calculated disregard for the claimant’s rights.

In this case, all four conditions of the working rule were deemed to have been met.

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please.

В интеренете нашел нужный интернет-сайт с информацией про купить диплом в России diplomik-home.com

続きを読みます adulttorrent.org

Current Offers