Campbell v McGrath

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, Campbell, the owner of Lot 6, sought to enforce a right of way over an existing driveway on Lot 12, which was owned by McGrath. Both lots were sold by a common vendor to separate purchasers. The dispute arose from whether the vendor intended to impose a right of way over the driveway on Lot 12 when it was sold to McGrath, who then conveyed it to the vendor, and subsequently to Campbell. The central question was whether the right of way over Lot 12 in favour of Lot 6 was created by estoppel or arose by implication of law under the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows, applicable to simultaneous sale and conveyance.

The court was tasked with determining the intent of the vendor in imposing the right of way and whether the circumstances met the criteria for establishing an easement by estoppel or under the Wheeldon v Burrows rule. The court needed to examine the terms of the contracts, the nature of the dealings between the vendor and the purchasers, and the subsequent conveyance of the lots. It was also necessary to consider the applicability of the Wheeldon v Burrows rule in the context of simultaneous sale and conveyance and whether the facts of this case met the conditions for its application.

The court concluded that the evidence did not support the existence of an easement by estoppel. The court found that the vendor had not intended to impose a right of way on Lot 12 at the time of sale to McGrath. Additionally, the court held that the Wheeldon v Burrows rule did not apply in this case because the sale and conveyance were not simultaneous in a manner that met the criteria established in relevant case law. The court determined that the right of way over Lot 12 in favour of Lot 6 was not established by either estoppel or by implication of law.

The court ordered that Campbell had no enforceable right of way over the driveway on Lot 12. The court dismissed Campbell's claim in its entirety.