Neighbouring homeowners disputed rights over a 14-foot strip of land between their properties containing two abutting driveways.
The respondents claimed a prescriptive easement based on historical use by predecessors in title.
The application judge found the easement had been acquired through the doctrine of lost modern grant and ordered the appellants to remove a fence erected on their property.
The appellants appealed, arguing the requirements for a prescriptive easement had not been met.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the evidence did not establish use "as of right" and that the easement was not reasonably necessary to the enjoyment of the dominant property.
