The words ‘mine’ and ‘mineral’ may be expressly defined for the purposes of certain statutes (for example, Mines and Quarries Act 1954, Coal Industry Act 1994, etc). Otherwise, each must be construed in accordance with the other words used in the document or statute and the factual context. In the particular context of minerals, whether or not a specific substance is a mineral or not is primarily a question of fact, to be determined in accordance with the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and among landowners at the relevant time. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Mines and minerals—property issues — What are mines and minerals?
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.
**Trials are provided to all LexisNexis content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisNexis services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: key decisions on compensation for compulsory electricity wayleaves, the construction of an...
HM Land Registry (HMLR) has announced that, from late August 2026, application-related correspondence, including requisitions, letters and notices,...
The Welsh Government has published circular WGC 007/2026 to introduce the Building etc. (Amendment) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2026, which came into...
Planning analysis: In Westminster CC v Gems House Residences, the Court of Appeal dismissed Westminster City Council’s appeal and upheld the High...
In a transfer of land if the rights reserved are stated to be ‘reserved for the benefit of the transferor and their successors in title the owners and occupiers of the retained land or any part thereof and all persons authorised by them’, does this create a valid reservation of rights for the
Are easements extinguished by unity of seisin where the servient tenement and part only of the dominant tenement are in common ownership? Will the remainder of the dominant tenement continue to enjoy the easements over the servient tenement?Unity of seisin (in modern terms, unity of ownership) is
The Prescription Act 1832 states ‘...The claimant must show a period of use of 20 years immediately preceding the claim’. A claimant establishes more than 20 years user of a right of access and is then sent letters by the servient owner stating there is no access. More than a year later a claim for
Easements lost by abandonmentIn order to show that an easement has been abandoned, the servient owner must show that the dominant owner had a clear and fixed intention never to:•exercise the right again on their own behalf, or•attempt to pass the right to anyone else Abandonment where the original
0330 161 1234