Sovmots v Secretary of State [1979]

S62 no, Wheeldon
v Burrows
no.
London Borough of Camden made compulsory purchase
order of 36 flats.
Did certain rights in respect of other parts of building,
without which flats could not be used as housing accommodation, pass on the
conveyance?
If not, did council have power to make a compulsory
purchase order for flats which, without the additional rights, could not be
used for housing purposes?
House of Lords quashed compulsory purchase order.
Main argument before courts was that the rights would
pass to acquiring authority either under rule in Wheeldon v Burrows or under s62.
Wheeldon v Burrows did not apply because is rule of intention,
based on proposition that a man may not derogate from his grant.
To apply this to a case where a public authority is
taking land from its owner against his will would be to stand rule on its head.
Nor does s62 apply because when land is under one ownership
[as, presumably, the whole building was here] makes no sense to speak of
rights, privileges or easements being exercised over one part for benefit of
another.
Whatever owner does he does as owner and until
separation of ownership or at least of occupation occurs, the condition for
existence of rights does not exist.