How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask LondonlawyerJ Your Own Question
LondonlawyerJ, Advocate
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 822
Experience:  Solicitor with over 15 years experience.
Type Your Law Question Here...
LondonlawyerJ is online now

I am about to inherit 3 acres of woodland from my father in

This answer was rated:

I am about to inherit 3 acres of woodland from my father in Law who died recently, he owned the adjacent land.
The woodland is served by two gates.
Gate A goes onto a lane which is unadopted, and no one is sure who owns it, this eventually leads onto a public high way.
Gate B on the opposite side of the wood, leads into a field which will be inherited by my Brother in Law, but there is access across the field to a gate that leads onto another public to a public high way.
My Brother in Law say I will have no rights across the land that he will inherit, and is unwilling to grant any rights
As I will want to extract timber across the land as gate B is the nearest to the public highway is there such a thing as a quasi right of way, that could be attached to the woodland when it is finally given to me.
There are three executors, my brother in law and two others, the other two agree that I should have a right of way to extract timber, but how can we move forward.
The solicitor acting for the trustees says she cannot get involved in inter executor disputes.
Can you help?
LondonlawyerJ :

Hello I am a solicitor with 20 years experience. I will try to help you with this.

LondonlawyerJ :

I am afraid there is no such right of access. You may have to research the ownership of the lane leading up to gate A oe use it and hope no one objects.


I am curious as to the decision, had there been no gate A are you saying that there still wouldnt be an access from gate B to the nearest highway?


If some one does object to me using gate A onto the nearest highway, your logic suggests that I have been gifted a piece of land with no access to extract timber, surely this cannot be correct.


Are you saying that if I am stooped from using gate A by some one who claims ownership of the lane then I have been gifted a piece of woodland with no way of extracting timber to a public highway.

LondonlawyerJ and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
I am afraid it can be correct.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

Hello I would like to end this dialogue, and will not be rating the advise further. I think this matter is too complicated for a chat forum, and I will not get the depth of advise that I require to make a decision as to whether I should take this matter to court. I was naive to think this would be the case. Thanks

IT is actually very simple. If you are bequeathed land by someone and there is no easement over neighbouring/surrounding land then there is no doctrine of implied easements. If the will makes it explicit that the woodland is bequeathed for the purpose of extracting timber then perhaps within the administration of the estate you can argue that your brother's attitude will frustrate the purpose of the will. This will require an express provision though.
LondonlawyerJ and other Law Specialists are ready to help you