The applicant sought a declaration of a prescriptive easement over a passageway on the respondent's adjoining property and damages for the pruning of an overhanging tree limb.
The court found that the historical use of the passageway by the applicant's predecessors was permissive and neighbourly, not 'as of right', and thus no prescriptive easement was established.
The court also dismissed the claim for damages, holding that the respondent was legally entitled at common law to prune the overhanging branches of the applicant's tree that intruded onto her property.
