(1) In this section 'public road' and 'road' have the meanings respectively ascribed to those expressions by the Roads Act 1993.
(2) A plan shall not be lodged in the office of the Registrar-General for registration or recording under Division 3 of Part 23 unless it indicates in the manner prescribed in respect of the plan by regulations made under this Act or the Real Property Act 1900:
(a) what easements, if any, are intended to be created:
(i) burdening land comprised in the plan and appurtenant to any existing roads shown on the plan, and
(ii) appurtenant to any roads to be vested upon registration of the plan,
(b) what easements, if any, referred to in section 88A are intended to be created burdening land comprised in the plan and in whose favour those easements are intended to be created,
(c) what other easements or profits à prendre, if any, are intended to be created appurtenant to or burdening land comprised in the plan, and
(c1) what easements or profits à prendre, if any, appurtenant to or burdening land comprised in the plan are intended to be released or partially released, and
(d) what restrictions on the use of land or positive covenants, if any, are intended to be created benefiting or burdening land comprised in the plan.
(3) On registration or recording under Division 3 of Part 23 of a plan upon which any easement, profit à prendre, restriction or positive covenant is indicated in accordance with paragraph (a), (b), (c) or (d) of subsection (2) then, subject to compliance with the provisions of this Division:
(a) any easement so indicated as intended to be created as appurtenant to any existing public roads shown in the plan or any roads to be vested in the council upon registration of the plan shall be created and shall without any further assurance vest in the council by virtue of such registration and of this Act,
(b) any easement so indicated as intended to be created pursuant to section 88A shall be created and shall without any further assurance vest in the relevant prescribed authority referred to in that section by virtue of such registration and of this Act,
(c) any other easement, profit à prendre or any restriction on the use of land (not being a restriction as to user of the type that may be imposed under section 88D or 88E) so indicated as intended to be created shall:
(i) be created,
(ii) without any further assurance and by virtue of such registration or recording and of this Act, vest in the owner of the land benefited by the easement or profit à prendre or be annexed to the land benefited by the restriction, as the case may be, notwithstanding that the land benefited and the land burdened may be in the same ownership at the time when the plan is registered or recorded and notwithstanding any rule of law or equity in that behalf, and
(iii) not be extinguished by reason of the owner of a parcel of land benefited by such easement, profit à prendre or restriction holding or acquiring a greater interest in a separate parcel of land burdened thereby, and
(d) any restriction on the use of land or positive covenant that is of the type that may be imposed under section 88BA, 88D or 88E and is so indicated as intended to be created takes effect as if it had been so imposed.
(3AA) On registration or recording under Division 3 of Part 23 of a plan on which a release of an easement or profit à prendre is indicated in accordance with subsection (2) (c1), the easement or profit à prendre is released.
(3A) When creating a folio of the Register kept under the Real Property Act 1900 for land benefited by any easement, or for land burdened by any easement, restriction on the use of land or positive covenant, created by this section, the Registrar-General shall record in that folio, in such manner as the Registrar-General considers appropriate, the easement, restriction on the use of land or positive covenant, as the case may be.
(4) Any restriction on the use of land or positive covenant created by this section shall for the purposes of this Act and the Real Property Act 1900, have effect as if it was contained in a deed. "
24 I accept the submission advanced for the defendant that an easement in gross can be created pursuant to s 88B(2)(a) and (3)(a). That is to say, I do not consider that s 88A is the only means of creating an easement in gross, nor, that the word "easement" when used in s 88B(2)(a) and (3)(a) has the meaning accorded at common law requiring both a servient and a dominant tenement. The word "easement" can be used to describe an easement in gross, that is, an easement without a dominant tenement, and is so described in s 88A. In R A Woodman, The Law of Real Property in New South Wales, (1980) Vol 1, The Law Book Company Ltd, at 308, Professor Woodman said:
" ... an easement in gross may be created by registration with the Registrar-General of a plan of subdivision indicating the intention to create it as an easement in gross: s. 88B(3)(b); and the same situation exists where it is intended to create easements as appurtenant to any existing public roads shown in the plan or roads to be vested in the council upon registration of the plan: s. 88B(3)(a).
Section 88A represents a statutory recognition of the practice whereby at common law there could be created what amounts to an easement without a dominant tenement. For example, a corporation constituted by the inhabitants of a town may have enjoyed from time immemorial the right to discharge drainage into a tidal river, or a highway authority may have enjoyed a right to discharge water on to land for draining a highway: see Gale on Easements , 14th ed., 143; Goodman v. Mayor etc., of Saltash (1882) 7 App. Cas. 633; Attorney-General v Copeland [1902] 1 K.B. 690. The Legislature has frequently taken rights of this kind for the Crown, or conferred them upon public or local authorities constituted by Act of Parliament, and called them easements; see Public Works Act , 1912, s. 4A; Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Act , 1924, s. 116; as to the assessment of compensation, see Rogerson v The Minister (1968) 16 L.G.R.A. 400; Brancatisano v. The Minister (1967) 16 L.G.R.A. 405. "
25 Professor Woodman's view that an easement appurtenant to an existing public road, to be vested in a council pursuant to s 88B(3)(a), can be created as an easement in gross, is repeated by the current authors of Woodman and Nettle: The Torrens System in New South Wales, 2nd ed (2003) Thomson Lawbook Co at 29059. That that is so is indicated by the fact that whilst all easements created under s 88B(3)(a) as appurtenant to an existing public road vest in "the Council" upon registration of the plan, not all public roads are owned by councils (ss 7 and 145 Roads Act 1993 (NSW)). That was also the position when s 88B was introduced into the Conveyancing Act by the Local Government and Conveyancing (Amendment) Act 1964 (NSW), (Commissioner for Main Roads v BP Australia Ltd (1964) 82 WN (Pt 2) (NSW) 27 at 29, 41-42).
26 In Bonvale Enterprises Pty Ltd v Halpenny Investments Pty Ltd (2005) 62 NSWLR 698, Burchett AJ held that the power conferred on the Court by s 88K of the Conveyancing Act to create easements did not extend to the creation of easements in gross. His Honour's conclusion that the word "easement" in s 88K had its technical meaning at common law requiring it to be for the benefit of an identified dominant tenement was based on the particular features of s 88K (see at 704 [8], 705-706 [11]-[13]). His Honour's construction of s 88K does not indicate the proper construction of s 88B(2)(a) and (3)(a).
27 However, the fact that an easement in gross could be created under ss 88B(2)(a) and (3)(a) does not necessarily mean that this has occurred here. The Council is the owner in fee simple of Mildon Road, and I can see no reason the parties could not create an easement which conforms with the common law requirements for an easement and of s 88(1) of the Conveyancing Act, rather than an easement in gross. The question is whether on the proper interpretation of the easement, the easement can only be used to drain water for the benefit of Mildon Road and the plaintiffs' lots identified as the lots benefited by the easement.
28 The defendant points to the language of Pt 3 of Sch 8. The Council is a person entitled to an estate in possession in Mildon Road which is land indicated as one of the dominant tenements. The defendant is a person authorised by the Council to drain water across and through the land indicated as a servient tenement.
29 It was submitted for the Council that it was not legitimate to construe the easement having regard to any implications which might flow from the common law requirement that an easement accommodate the dominant tenement or from the statutory context of s 88B of the Conveyancing Act including the presence of s 88A and Pt 3 of Sch 4A. Rather, it was submitted, the High Court's decision in Westfield Management Ltd v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [2007] HCA 45; (2007) 239 ALR 75; 81 ALJR 1887, limited the matters to which it was legitimate to have regard in construing the easement to the "four walls of the easement" and the physical characteristics of the land.
30 I do not consider that there is anything in Westfield Management Ltd v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd, or in Sertari Pty Ltd v Nirimba Developments Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 324 which either requires or justifies ignoring the statutory context of s 88B(3)(a) or the common law requirements of an easement. Those cases dealt with the question of what extrinsic facts are admissible to construe an easement. That is a different question.
31 The defendant accepts that if the easement had been created pursuant to ss 88B(2)(c) and (3)(c), the same words would be read as only authorising the use of the servient tenement by the Council (or the person entitled to an estate in possession of the lots identified as lots benefited by the easement) or a person authorised by it (or such persons), for the benefit of the dominant tenement. But counsel for the defendant submits that that is so because in the case of an easement created under s 88B(3)(c) the easement, to be valid, must accommodate the dominant tenement. It was submitted that because there was no such requirement for an easement appurtenant to a public road which vests in a council pursuant to s 88B(3)(a), there is no reason to read down the literal words of the easement by such an implication.
32 The easement is not fully expressed simply by the terms of Pt 3 of Sch 8 of the Conveyancing Act quoted in para [7] above. Those words are to be read in the context of the instrument set out at para [6] above which names specified lots and Mildon Road as the lands benefited by the easement and does not name the Council as a person or authority benefited. The parties chose not to create the easement as an easement in gross using the terms in Part 3 of Sch 4A which contains no reference to a dominant tenement.
33 The construction of the easement under Pt 3 of Sch 8 that the rights granted are to be granted for the benefit of the dominant tenement does not merely arise by implication from the nature of a true easement at common law. Such an implication could be rebutted by the fact that s 88A(2)(a) and (3)(a) allow the creation of an easement in gross. But the construction also arises from the express terms of the instrument which identifies particular lots and Mildon Road as the lots and road benefited. It is also significant that in the instrument the Council is not separately named as an authority benefited. The benefit of the easement is expressly stated to attach to the identified pieces of land. Thus, whilst I accept that an easement in gross could be created under s 88A(3)(a), I do not consider that that was the kind of right the parties intended to create.
34 Regulation 33 of the Conveyancing (General) Regulation 2003 specifies the requirements for the form and content of s 88B instruments. It provides:
"33 Form and content of section 88B instruments