If you own residential property in British Columbia subject to an easement, it’s essential to understand how easements work and what actions might illegally obstruct one.

An actionable obstruction occurs when someone interferes with the proper functioning of a registered easement, preventing the rightful beneficiary from fully exercising their rights. When this happens, the courts can step in to stop the obstruction and restore the beneficiary’s access to their legal entitlements under the easement.

Neighbour Dispute Over Easement Access

In Hellmen v. Hartwick, the Supreme Court of British Columbia dealt with a dispute between neighbouring property owners in Kamloops. The petitioners lived on Lot 1 of District Lot 232, while the respondents lived on Lot 3. Between these two parcels sits Lot 2, a narrow land strip that the respondents own.

Lot 2 is subject to a registered easement for the benefit of Lot 1. This easement grants the owners of Lot 1 the right to pass over part of Lot 2 for the purpose of accessing their property, whether on foot, by vehicle, or otherwise.

The petitioners claimed the respondents interfered with this easement by physically blocking their ability to travel across Lot 2. Specifically, they alleged the respondents had erected a fence and gate across the north end of Lot 2 and parked vehicles in a way that obstructed passage. As a result, the petitioners asked the court for an injunction to stop further interference and to require the removal of the obstructive fence and gate.

Interpreting the Scope of the Easement

To resolve the matter, the Court first reviewed the specific language of the registered easement. It found the original intent behind the easement was clear: to provide a corridor for the occupants of Lot 1 to reach their property from the east side via Lot 2. The easement granted a right of passage, not broader rights, to use Lot 2 for any other purpose.

While the owners of Lot 1 were permitted to use the easement to reach and leave their property, they did not gain any additional rights to enjoy the scenery, build on, or otherwise use Lot 2. The easement simply enabled them to traverse the land to make full use of Lot 1, including construction or development on their own parcel.

What Constitutes an Actionable Obstruction?

Under the easement, the owners of Lot 1 were granted access rights to pass through Lot 2, but nothing beyond that. The owners of Lot 2 (the respondents) retained the remaining property rights and were free to use their land as they chose, so long as they didn’t interfere with the right-of-way granted to Lot 1.

That means the respondents could use Lot 2 in any way, provided their actions did not prevent the petitioners from accessing their property via the easement. Any conduct that interfered with this right of passage (intentionally or not) could be considered an actionable obstruction.

To prove that such obstruction has occurred, the burden lies with the party making the claim (in this case, the petitioners). On a balance of probabilities, they must demonstrate that the interference significantly impaired their ability to use the easement. The Court applied a practical test: is the easement still usable in a substantially similar way to how it was used before the alleged interference?

The interference is often considered obvious if the obstruction is permanent, such as a built structure.

Did the Respondents Interfere With the Easement?

The petitioners argued that the respondents’ vehicles parked along the southeastern edge of Lots 1 and 2 amounted to obstruction. However, the Court disagreed. That section of the property had only ever allowed foot traffic, and people could still walk around the parked vehicles. Therefore, the Court found that this did not qualify as actionable interference.

The Court reached a different conclusion regarding the fence and gate the respondents installed from the northwest corner of Lot 2 to the northeast corner of the petitioners’ house. This fence reduced the usable width of the driveway connecting the petitioners’ garage to the road. The Court found that this significantly impaired the petitioners’ ability to access their garage, an essential use of their property.

Based on this, the Court concluded that the fence and gate amounted to substantial and actionable obstructions of the easement.

Balancing Property Rights and Legal Obligations

The respondents argued the fence was necessary to deter trespassers and protect their own property. They claimed they were entitled to take steps to secure their land as they saw fit.

The Court acknowledged the respondents’ right to safeguard their property. However, it emphasized that this right must be balanced against the legal obligations imposed by the easement. Importantly, the Court found that the respondents could have protected their property without breaching the easement.

To resolve the dispute, the Court ordered the respondents to remove the existing fence and gate that obstructed the northern portion of Lot 2. However, the Court also permitted the respondents to install a new gate at a different location (next to the northeast corner of the petitioners’ house) so long as it was motorized, remotely controlled, and accessible to the petitioners.

The Court required the respondents to provide the petitioners with any remote devices or access codes needed to ensure uninterrupted access to their property through Lot 2.

Takeaways for B.C. Property Owners

This case illustrates how courts interpret and enforce easements in B.C. Property owners should be aware that while easements do not grant full use of the burdened land, they do guarantee specific legal rights that must be respected.

Any interference with an easement, particularly if it limits physical access to property, can be grounds for legal action. The courts will assess whether the interference materially restricts the easement holder’s ability to use the right-of-way as intended, and if so, will likely order appropriate remedies.

Contact CM Lawyers for Dynamic Advice on Property Disputes in Vernon & Salmon Arm

If you own property that is subject to or benefits from an easement, it’s important to understand both your rights and your obligations. At CM Lawyers, our knowledgeable real estate lawyers can help ensure you’re acting within the bounds of the law and avoid potentially costly disputes. When disagreements arise, we provide strategic representation in negotiations and court proceedings, advocating to secure the best possible outcome for our clients. To book a consultation, please call us in Vernon at (250) 308-0338 or Salmon Arm at (250) 803-9171 or contact us online.