The appellant sought a declaration of a prescriptive right-of-way over adjoining lands used for cottage access.
The appeal turned on whether the claimed easement accommodated the dominant tenement and whether some degree of necessity was required despite long, non-permissive use.
The court held that the trial judge erred in concluding the use did not accommodate the appellant's land and further erred in importing a necessity requirement into a prescriptive easement analysis.
The appeal was allowed, a declaration of easement was granted, ancillary relief concerning obstructing posts was ordered, and costs were awarded to the appellant.
