The Supreme Court is to hear an appeal against a ruling that rights to use sporting and recreational facilities can constitute easements.
The court has announced that Lords Neuberger, Wilson and Hodge granted permission to appeal to the freehold and leasehold owners of the Broome Park Estate, Barham, Canterbury, against an April decision of the Court of Appeal.
The case raises the question whether rights to use the swimming pool, golf course, squash courts, tennis courts, the ground and basement floor of Broome Park Mansion House, gardens and any other sporting or recreational facilities were easements.
The claim was brought by the freehold owner of Elham House, Canterbury, which lies in the middle of the Broome Park Estate, and timeshare owners of villas built in its grounds.
They claim the rights were included in a transfer of land that formed part of the timeshare development and so are valid easements. If held not to be easements, they took effect as personal rights that do not run with the land, and, since the house and gardens had changed hands, would now have been lost.
Last April, the Court of Appeal decided that the rights to use the gardens, tennis courts, squash courts, putting green, croquet lawn and 18-hole golf course were all valid easements. As a result, the timeshare owners would not be liable to pay for the upkeep or use of those facilities.
It found that the right to use the original outdoor swimming pool would also have qualified, prior to its closure in 2000, and there may still be a valid easement to use an outdoor swimming pool on the site of the original one. However, it said that they do not have an easement to use an indoor swimming pool built in 2005.
The court also ruled that the rights to use the billiard and television rooms, and the restaurant, bar, gym, sunbed and sauna areas in the mansion house, did not qualify.
To send feedback, e-mail jess.harrold@egi.co.uk or tweet @jessharrold or @estatesgazette