Bookville Pty Ltd v O'Loghlen

Bookville Pty Ltd sought relief from the Supreme Court of Queensland, challenging the right of O'Loghlen to maintain a right of way across Bookville's property. The central issue was whether O'Loghlen's right of way, established through a deed, remained valid after a wall was constructed by Bookville, which effectively blocked access. Bookville argued that the wall's construction, combined with limited use of the easement, indicated abandonment, while O'Loghlen maintained the easement's continued existence and sought injunctive relief to prevent the wall's completion.

The court examined whether the evidence demonstrated an intention to abandon the easement. It noted that the limited use of the easement, coupled with the wall's construction, did not necessarily equate to abandonment. The court emphasised the importance of clear and unequivocal evidence to establish abandonment. Bookville's evidence regarding the limited use of the easement did not sufficiently demonstrate an intention to abandon it. The court concluded that the wall's construction did not automatically result in the easement's abandonment.

The Supreme Court of Queensland ruled in favour of O'Loghlen, finding that the easement remained valid and enforceable. The court held that the wall's construction did not constitute an abandonment of the easement, and the limited use of the easement was not conclusive evidence of abandonment. Bookville was ordered to remove the wall, thereby restoring access over the easement. The court also granted O'Loghlen an injunction to prevent Bookville from completing the wall and any other actions that would obstruct the easement.