Key Takeaways
- The owner of a wellness retreat, Joy Jarvis, has been ordered to pay a £90,000 court bill after using her Bentley to blockade a GP’s car park during a neighbor dispute.
- The dispute centered around access rights to a narrow driveway that provides access to both Jarvis’s land and the GP’s car park.
- The court ruled in favor of the GP, Dr. Reshma Rasheed, finding that she has a right of way over the entire length of the driveway.
- The judge rejected Jarvis’s claim that Dr. Rasheed only has the right to use the front portion of the lane.
- The dispute has been ongoing for several years and has resulted in significant disruption to the surgery’s operations.
Introduction to the Dispute
The Independent is committed to providing quality journalism to the public, and donations from readers help support this mission. One recent story that highlights the importance of access to justice is the case of Joy Jarvis, the owner of an award-winning wellness retreat, who was ordered to pay a £90,000 court bill after using her Bentley to blockade a GP’s car park during a bitter neighbor dispute. The dispute centered around access rights to a narrow driveway that provides access to both Jarvis’s land and the GP’s car park. The driveway has been a point of contention between Jarvis and Dr. Reshma Rasheed, the owner of the GP surgery, for several years.
The History of the Dispute
The dispute began in 2021 when Jarvis and her husband, Brian, acquired the land behind the surgery. The couple claimed that Dr. Rasheed only had the right to use the front portion of the lane, while Dr. Rasheed argued that she had a right of way over the entire length of the driveway. The dispute escalated when Jarvis used her Bentley to blockade the car park, effectively "landlocking" it and rendering it unusable. Dr. Rasheed’s barrister, Rupert Myers, argued that the blockade was a deliberate attempt to deny access to the surgery and caused significant disruption to its operations.
The Court Ruling
The case went to trial at Central London County Court, where Judge Alan Johns ruled in favor of Dr. Rasheed. The judge found that Dr. Rasheed had a right of way over the entire length of the driveway, based on a 1973 conveyance and the fact that the driveway had been used by the surgery for over 50 years. The judge rejected Jarvis’s claim that Dr. Rasheed only had the right to use the front portion of the lane, finding that there was no feature on the ground to mark out the extent of the right of way. The judge also noted that the use of the driveway as an access to the car park for more than 50 years would give Dr. Rasheed a right to continue using it.
The Consequences of the Ruling
The ruling has significant consequences for Jarvis, who has been ordered to pay Dr. Rasheed’s lawyers’ bills for the case so far, totaling £90,000. The judge also rejected Jarvis’s claim for an injunction requiring Dr. Rasheed to remove drains and cables from under the driveway, saying there was "no proper foundation" for an order. Further allegations of trespass by Jarvis against Dr. Rasheed remain unresolved and will return to court at a later date, if not settled. The dispute has been ongoing for several years and has resulted in significant disruption to the surgery’s operations.
The Importance of Access to Justice
The case highlights the importance of access to justice and the need for quality journalism to hold those in power accountable. The Independent’s reporting on this story and others like it is made possible by donations from readers. By supporting independent journalism, readers can help ensure that stories like this one are told and that those who are affected by disputes like this one have a voice. The case also highlights the importance of resolving disputes through the legal system, rather than resorting to blockade or other forms of obstruction.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the case of Joy Jarvis and Dr. Reshma Rasheed highlights the importance of access to justice and the need for quality journalism to hold those in power accountable. The dispute centered around access rights to a narrow driveway and resulted in significant disruption to the surgery’s operations. The court ruling in favor of Dr. Rasheed has significant consequences for Jarvis, who has been ordered to pay a £90,000 court bill. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of resolving disputes through the legal system and the need for quality journalism to tell the stories that need to be told.
