Cases - Daniells v Mendonca
Record details
- Name
- Daniells v Mendonca
- Date
- (1999)
- Citation
- 78 P&CR 401, CA
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Party walls
- Summary
-
The plaintiff and defendants owned adjoining properties. While the plaintiff was abroad, the defendants built an extension utilising a wall built entirely on the plaintiff's land, without her permission and without complying with the 1939 Act. The work was inadequate structurally and posed a fire risk. The plaintiff claimed a mandatory injunction requiring the removal of the part of the extension that encroached on her land and an order that the defendants should not carry out any further work without complying with the 1939 Act. She also claimed damages for trespass.
The Court of Appeal decided that the original judge had been correct to grant a mandatory injunction for the removal of the encroachment. Although the trespass was only 1.5 inches over a length of 12 feet, the Court considered that the test in Shelfer had been satisfied. The court did not think that the injury could be adequately compensated by a small payment. Nor did the court consider that an injunction would be oppressive, relying, in particular, on the defendants' conduct, including their failure to comply with the 1939 Act.