Introduction
The rule set out in Long v Gowlett [1923] 2 Ch 177 focuses on obtaining rights through extended use. The case confirms that no right can be claimed if there was no prior use to support it. This central rule in property law restricts establishing easements and profits à prendre solely by duration. Necessary conditions for proving such rights include showing actual use, consistent use, and use without permission – nec vi, nec clam, nec precario (without force, secrecy, or consent). The court’s decision in Long v Gowlett provides clear guidance on the boundaries of obtaining rights through prolonged use.
The Facts of Long v Gowlett
The dispute involved a claim to a path over the defendant's land. The plaintiff argued this right existed due to long-standing use, stating he and previous owners had used the path for many years. However, records showed the use changed over time. The path had been used for various purposes, some temporarily allowed and unrelated to the specific right claimed.
The Court’s Analysis and Decision
The Court of Appeal rejected the plaintiff’s claim. Lord Justice Warrington stated that proving a right through prolonged use requires evidence of use matching the right asserted. The court found the plaintiff’s use irregular, involving activities not directly tied to a path right. The changing and mixed use prevented recognition of a right by duration.
The Importance of "No New Right Without Prior Use"
The decision in Long v Gowlett reinforces the principle that rights cannot be newly formed through prolonged use. It can only acknowledge rights already exercised openly, consistently, and without consent. The judgment clarifies that the use must remain unchanged over the required period and align precisely with the right claimed.
Comparing Long v Gowlett to Other Decisions
Long v Gowlett differs from cases like Dalton v Angus (1881) 6 App Cas 740, where steady and continuous use upheld a right. In Dalton v Angus, the use matched the claimed right, unlike the shifting use in Long v Gowlett. This difference shows the need for uniform and specific use in proving rights by duration.
Relevance of Long v Gowlett in Modern Property Law
The rule from Long v Gowlett remains central in current property law. It serves as a primary test for assessing claims based on prolonged use. The case stresses the need for clear and consistent evidence showing the use of the asserted right. Modern applications often involve disputes over paths, light access, and water use. Courts regularly cite the core rule that new rights cannot arise by duration, maintaining the requirement of prior use.
Conclusion
Long v Gowlett [1923] 2 Ch 177 defines a major legal principle about obtaining rights through extended use. The case confirms that claims based on prolonged use cannot create rights where none existed before. The decision highlights proving consistent, uninterrupted, and specific use matching the right claimed. This principle, established decades ago, continues to shape property law and provides a straightforward method for resolving disputes over rights obtained by duration. The requirement of prior use protects against unverified claims and ensures certainty in property rights. Comparisons to Dalton v Angus and similar cases clarify distinctions in proving rights through use. The standards from Long v Gowlett offer essential guidance for legal professionals and property owners.
