0
On 27 November 2025, the Supreme Court granted permission to appeal in the high-profile case of Stenner v Teignbridge District Council. This leapfrog appeal brings into sharp focus a critical legal question: what is the correct judicial test when applying the “ouster principle” to determine whether a claimed easement is legally valid and capable of forming the subject matter of a grant?
The case could challenge the long-standing precedent set by Batchelor v Marlow [2001] EWCA Civ 1051, which has shaped the legal landscape around easements for over two decades. At the heart of the appeal is Mr. Stenner’s claim to an easement allowing him to store his boats on a triangular parcel of land, owned by the council, during the winter months.
Both the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal previously ruled against the appellant, concluding that the claimed right contravened the ouster principle and thus could not qualify as an easement. However, with the Supreme Court now set to hear the matter, a potential shift in property law could be on the horizon.
David Holland KC is leading Rupert Cohen in representing the appellant, Mr. Stenner, instructed by Jasdeep Rai of Spencer West LLP.
