WILLIAMS v Mitchell

In *Williams v Mitchell*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between the appellant, Williams, and the respondent, Mitchell, concerning the interpretation and enforceability of a deed. The core of the disagreement revolved around whether the deed, which purported to grant Mitchell a right of way over Williams' property, was valid and binding.

The Court was required to determine whether the deed was sufficiently certain in its terms to be enforceable, particularly regarding the precise location and nature of the right of way. Further, the Court had to consider whether the deed had been properly executed and delivered so as to create a binding legal obligation. The question of whether Mitchell had a legitimate interest in the right of way, and if so, whether that interest was adequately defined, was also central to the appeal.

The Court of Appeal found that the deed was void for uncertainty. It reasoned that the description of the right of way was too vague and ambiguous to allow for its practical identification and enforcement. The principles applied by the Court emphasised the need for certainty in property rights, particularly easements, stating that for a right of way to be legally recognised, its boundaries and scope must be clearly ascertainable. Without such clarity, the law cannot give effect to the purported grant.

Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the previous orders and holding that the deed was not enforceable.