Published: Fri, 12 Oct 2018
Wong v Beaumont Property Trust Ltd  1 QB 673
Property law – Easement – Implied term – Easement of Necessity Implied
Wong, the tenant of the property had covenanted the property into a restaurant. Three cellars were let to control and eliminate smells and odours caused by the restaurant so they did not cause annoyance to the landlord. Beaumont had complained about the smells of the restaurant and an inspection determined that ducts should be installed as part of a proper ventilation system. A duct was required to be fitted to the outside wall of the landlord’s property. The landlord refused to grant access to Wong to install the vent.
Whether there was an implied requirement for the landlord to grant access to Wong for the purposes of hygiene and health and safety.
The appeal by the landlord was dismissed. At the time of the lease being granted and afterwards, there was always a requirement that a vent would need to be installed so that the restaurant could legally carry out their business. The Court applied the case of Pwllback Colliery Co Ltd v Woodman, holding that an easement can only be implied where the purpose of the lease cannot be carried out without it. The landlord had consented to the use of the premise as a restaurant and therefore, even though there was no term in the contract or easement for such an installation, Wong had established an easement of necessity. Wong was entitled to gain access to the property for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and repairing a ventilation system for use in connection with the restaurant.
Cite This Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below: