The applicant sought a prescriptive easement over a sand path on the respondents' land to access the beach from his cottage.
The respondents opposed, arguing the easement was not reasonably necessary and that their predecessors in title were unaware of the path's use.
The court found that the path was reasonably necessary for the better enjoyment of the cottage property and that the applicant had proven 20 years of continuous, open, and uninterrupted use.
The motion for a prescriptive easement was granted.
